University of Massachusetts at Boston

Graduate College of Education

Teacher Education Program


Computers, Technology and Education

Ed 610 (Section for Middle/Secondary educators)

Fall 2001 Syllabus


Instructor: Peter Taylor, Critical & Creative Thinking Program
Email: peter.taylor@umb.edu
Phone: 617-287-7636
Office: Wheatley 2nd flr 143.09 (near Counseling & School Psychology)
Classtime: Thursdays 6.45-9.15, Sept. 6- Dec. 13 (except Nov. 22)
Classroom MacLab D in Healey Library basement UL
Office/phone call hours: M 2.30-3.30, W 6.40-7.20, Th 5.00-6.20, or by arrangement
Course Website: http://omega.cc.umb.edu/~ptaylor/610-01Fp.html
Class email list: Emails sent to ed610@egroups.com will go to everyone in the course
E-clippings: Send course-related items you find on the web to Ed610Clips@egroups.com

CATALOG DESCRIPTION


An introduction to using computers and technology in education. The various uses of computers and technology in education are examined in depth as participants are introduced to a wide variety of K-12 educational software and the Internet, and explore pedagogical issues raised by the use of computers for students, teachers and school administrators. These include the consequences for learning; problem-solving; organizing data; creativity; and an integrated curriculum. Finally, the course looks at ways in which technology may be used as a tool to facilitate changes in the ways teachers teach and students learn, and ultimately to stimulate reform in education. The course has a field component where students observe computers being used in the classroom.

PREREQUISITES: None, except curriculum development/lesson design courses/experience recommended

TEXTS: Xeroxed readings available on reserve in Healey.

SECTIONS TO FOLLOW IN SYLLABUS:

ADDITIONAL SECTIONS ON COURSE WEB PORTAL: Student Projects, present and past; Current issues and conflicting viewpoints about computers in education; Online resources for teachers who are students of computers in education; Links for teachers to the curriculum ideas/lesson plans/assessment ideas of other teachers; and more.

ACCOMMODATIONS: Sections 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 offer guidelines for curriculum modifications and adaptations for students with documented disabilities. If applicable, students may obtain adaptation recommendations from the Ross Center (287-7430). The student must present these recommendations to each professor within a reasonable period, preferably by the end of the Drop/Add period.
Throughout this syllabus attributes of the Thoughtful and Responsive Educator are indicated in brackets:

ASSESSMENT & REQUIREMENTS:


More detail about the assignments and expectations is provided in the Teaching/Learning Tools and Rubirc sections of the syllabus, and will be supplemented when needed by handouts and emails

Written assignments and presentations, 2/3 of grade
A. Project on the sound use of computers and educational technology to aid thinking, learning, communication and action in classrooms or other educational settings. This may be a curriculum unit/supplement or a research paper, and optionally may involve a website or other software-basedpresentation. A sequence of 5 assignments is required--initial description, notes on research and planning, work-in-progress presentation, complete draft, and final report (1200-2000 words). [uP, uT]
B. Three mini-essays that weave the course material--readings, activities, homework tasks--into your own thinking [uP, uT, pR]
C. Group presentation evaluating software and software-based lesson (see handout for guidelines) [uP, uT]
D. Report analyzing fieldwork observations (500-1000 words) (see handout for guidelines) [uP, uT]

Participation and contribution to the class process, 1/3 of grade.
E. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings (=14 items) [pCo]
F. Professional Development (PD) Workbook submitted for perusal week 6 or 7 & week 14 (=2 items)
= Professional Development Worksheets and Homework tasks, including Notes and reflections on readings, class discussions, clippings (including copies of items posted on ed610Clips), progress in your individual project, etc. [cL, uP, uT, pR]
G. Minimum of two in-office or phone conferences on your assignments and project, before weeks 6 and 12 (=2 items) [cM]
H. Peer commentaries on two other students' draft reports (with copies submitted to PT) [pCo]
I. Assignment Check-list maintained by student and submitted week 12 [uA]
J. Process Review on the development of your work, included with your PD Workbook at end-of-semester perusal [cL, pR]

This syllabus is subject to change, but workload expectations will not be increased after the semester starts. (Version 3 September 01)

Students are advised to retain a copy of this syllabus in personal files for use when applying for certification, licensure, or transfer credit.

COURSE OVERVIEW and OBJECTIVES



This course does not simply assume that computers and other new technologies are good for education and then try to maximize the software tools you master in a semester. Instead, in learning about computers and technology in education [uT], the thoughtful and responsive educator or traineee-educator needs to:
In this spirit, class activities and homework tasks acquaint you with specific computer-based tools, the ideas behind them, and evaluating their effectiveness. Guidelines are introduced concerning specific situations and specific ways in which specific technologies can be of significant educational benefit [cE, cM, uC, uP, uA, uT]. The course addresses the following general ways (from most important to least) that teachers and/or students use computers and other technologies as tools in education:

It is important to acknowledge the context in which educators are being asked to develop their capacity to use technology effectively in education. Although the information potentially available to anyone with internet access is rapidly expanding, knowledge, as the poet T. S. Eliot observed, can be lost in information. We need to provide tools for ourselves and for students that genuinely enhance learning. Among other things this means--as always in education--addressing the diversity of students' intelligences, backgrounds, and interests [pJ]. In this multi-faceted endeavor, teachers trying to keep up with best practices will find many unevaluated claims and unrealistic expectations, controversy, uncertainty, and rapid change. In the area of educational technology, therefore--even more so than in others areas of education--teachers need to:

A key requirement of the course is that students maintain a Professional Development Workbook, which contains records or products of homework tasks, assignments, and other reflections on the course and the objectives A-E above [cD, pR]. The homework tasks include computer exercises designed so that you digest the ideas and practices you are introduced to, that is, incorporate them into your own thought and work. Other homework tasks are designed to engender a commitment to and capacity for ongoing professional development and building learning communities [cL, pC, pCo].

There is also a fieldwork requirement in which you a) observe how the tools are actually used (or not used) in classrooms or interact with people who have considerable experience in using the tools (ref: Hubbard and Power), and b) reflect on and analyze that experience [uP, pR].

Around mid-semester you start projects on topics related to your individual concerns as an educator [uP]. At the end of the semester you showcase your projects, which will be linked to the course website [cM].

In summary, the course as a whole aims for you--as a teacher or educational professional--to better fulfill the needs of your school, community, or organization [uP, cD]; address the information explosion [uT]; adapt to social changes [pJ]; and collaborate with others to these ends [pCo].

-------------
See also the Guidelines for assignments given in the secttion on Key Teaching/Learning Tools and summarized in Rubrics. Additional information about classes, assignments, and other tasks may be provided in handouts (which will also be posted on the course website) or emails (which are archived on http://www.egroups.com/group/ed610).

Bring an old pillow or piece of material to cover your monitor when your attention needs to be elsewhere.

SCHEDULE OF CLASSES


Class on September6, 13, 20, 27// October 4, 11, 18, 25 // November 1, 8, 15, 29 // December 6, 13

Class 1. (9/6) Internet searches by teachers for lesson plans integrating technology
Learning objectives:
Activities:

Class 2. (9/13) Active learning by students through internet searches
Preparation: Homework tasks from class 1
Learning objectives:
Activities:
*A* Asmt due: Mini-essay 1.

Class 3. (9/20) Software that facilitates group interaction
Reading: Snyder, "Blinded by science."
Learning objectives:
Activities:

Class 4. (9/27) Software for Problem-posing, Problem-solving, and Persuasion (3Ps)
**meet in W-2-031 (first corridor on left off catwalk)**
Reading: Peterson and Jungck, "Problem-posing." Also review Mendelian genetics in any introductory biology book.
Learning objectives:
Activities:
Additional readings:
Cartier, "A modeling approach" (on reserve)
Eisenhart, "Learning science" (on reserve)
*A* Asmt due: Mini-essay 2

Class 5. (10/4) Communicating knowledge
Learning objectives:
Activities:
Additional reading:
Parker, "Absolute Powerpoint"
*A* PD workbooks of students with last names A-L collected for first perusal (returned week 6)

Demonstration 10/11 5.30-6.30 Mac Lab D

Class 6. (10/11) Workshop on evaluating software and software-based lessons, starting individual projects, and revising PD plans
Readings: Review Reports and Briefings from previous classes (linked to course website)
Learning objectives:
Activities:
*A* Asmt due: Mini-essay 3 or Fieldwork report
*A* PD workbooks of students with last names M-Z collected for first perusal (returned week 7)

Class 7. (10/18) Achieving Equitable Access to Learning
Readings: Meyer & Rose, "Universal design," Anon, "Universal design"
Learning objectives:
Activities:
Additional readings:
de Castell et al., "Object lessons" (on reserve and on WWW)
*A* Before class 7: First in-office or phone conferences on your assignments and project

Class 8. (10/25) Teacher Evaluations of Software and Software-based Lessons
Learning objectives:
Activities:
*A* Asmt due: Group Presentation
*A* Asmt due: Revised initial description of your individual project

Class 9. (11/1) Workshop and peer coaching to learn and practice more computer tools
Learning objectives:
Activities:
*A* Asmt due: Mini-essay 3 or Fieldwork report

Class 10. (11/8) Work-in-progress presentations by students I
Learning objectives:
Activities:
*A* Asmt due: Presentation (or next class)
*A* Asmt due: Notes on research and planning for your project

Class 11. (11/15) Work-in-progress presentations by students II
Learning objectives and Activities: see week 10
*A* Asmt due: Presentation (or previous class)

No class 11/22
Class 12. (11/29) Computers as tools that extend and constrain thinking: Case of Computer models of Global Change
Learning objectives:
Activities:
After-class Reading: Taylor, "How do we know"
Homework task: Locate additional articles to support the positions(s) you favor in the readings for class 13 and counter those you oppose.
*A* Before class 12: Second in-office or phone conferences on your assignments and project
*A* Asmt due: Complete draft report plus electronic version by email or on disk
*A* Submit a copy of your assignment check-list so PT can alert you about discrepancies with his records.

Class 13. (12/6) Reinforcing and dismantling barriers and inequalities
Readings = Zhao and Conway, "What's in," Kraut, "Internet paradox" plus clippings in response, Van Gelder, "The strange case," Turkle, "Computational Reticence," Turkle, Life on the Screen, 9-26, Sclove and Scheuer, "For the architects of the Info-Highway," Kling, "Social controversies," "The net that binds" and other clippings (xeroxed handouts).
Learning objectives:
Activities:
Additional readings: Section in Kling on "social relations in electronic communities."
*A* Before class 13. Comment on at least two of the draft reports (linked to the course website) emailed to the student. (Include copies with PD workbook)

Class 14. (12/13) Taking Stock of Course: Where have we come and where do we go from here?/ Showplace for Websites
**meet in Center for Library Instruction, 4th floor, Healey Library**
Learning objectives:
Activities:

*A* Project final reports: due one day before last class by email attachment or on disk
*A* PD workbooks collected for end-of-semester perusal. (Arrange to collect this after one week or supply a self-addressed stamped box to post it back to you.)
*A* Process review

KEY TEACHING/LEARNING TOOLS


including guidelines for assignments.
Note: If you get behind, ask for an extension or skip the assignment/item--it defeats the learning goals to submit a stack of late work.

A. Stages of development for course project [cM, uA, uT]
The course project should not be seen as a "term paper," but as a process of development that involves dialogue with the instructor and other students and revision (re-seeing) in light of that dialogue (see examples of previous students' assignments and my comments, on reserve). To facilitate that process, a sequence of five assignments and peer commentary is required. The goals of each stage are described below.
Initial description
Building on your in-class draft and comments back from me, compose an initial overview of your project. This overview may, several revisions later, end up setting the scene in the introduction of your project. In one-two prose paragraphs (not bullets), an overview should convey subject, audience, and your reason for working on this project. The subject must relate to the sound use of computers and educational technology to aid thinking, learning, communication and action in classrooms or other educational settings. The project may be a curriculum unit/supplement or a research paper, and optionally may involve a website or other software-basedpresentation. For previous semesters' projects see http://omega.cc.umb.edu/~ptaylor/610-01p.html.
Notes on research and planning [uT]
Pull together notes on your reading and your thinking and present it in a form organized so it can elicit useful comments from a reader (in this case, me). Show that you are finding out what others have been doing in your area of interest. You should include an updated overview and an outline and/or annotated bibliography of readings done or planned. Record the full citations (not just the URLs) for your sources. I recommend starting to use a bibliographic database. Endnote can be downloaded for a 30 day trial from http://www.endnote.com
Work-in-progress presentation [pCo]
Preparing presentations, hearing yourself deliver them, and getting feedback usually leads to self-clarification of the overall direction of your project and of your priorities for further work. In this spirit, 13 minute presentations of your work-in-progress are scheduled early in your projects and are necessarily on work-in-progress. Convey the important features of work you have already done and, to elicit useful feedback during 3-5 minutes of Q&A, indicate also where additional investigation or advice are needed and where you think that might lead you. A website or powerpoint presentation is not expected at this stage, but may be used.
Complete draft report
Whatever form your report takes, it should Grab readers' attention, Orient them, and move through Steps so that they appreciate the Position you have led them to and how it matches the subject of your project. You should also include material that conveys your process of development during the semester and in the future. The report should not be directed to the instructor, but conceived as something helpful to your teacher colleagues. The draft must get to the end to count, even if some sections along the way are only sketches.
Final report (1200-2000 words, plus bibliography of references cited, optionally including website or powerpoint presentation)
For the report to be counted as final, you must have revised in response to comments from instructor and peers on complete draft. Allow time for the additional investigation and thinking that may be entailed.

B. Mini-essays [pR]
The goal of mini-essays (200-400 words) is for you to weave the course material--readings, activities, homework tasks--into your own thinking, and for this to help you bring your own thinking back into class activities. Provide sources or support for any views you present. Although I will suggest some possible topics for the mini-essays, the choice of topic is open as long as it meets this goal. Mini-essays topics can include lesson plans. Write as if the audience were other teachers, not only the instructor.

C. Software evaluation
In groups of 2 or 3 students with a similar area/level of teaching, identify some software you want to examine and find lessons using that software (suggestions/listings will be provided if needed). Each group will fashion their own manageable evaluation rubric from a selection provided (see course web portal) and will illustrate its use in a 10-15 minute presentation to the rest of the class. A 200-500 word handout shoud accompany the presentation. This assignment allows to class to experience a greater range of software and software-based lessons than the instructor on his own could.

D. Fieldwork [cM, uP, uT, pR]
Building on what you have learned in Teacher Inquiry courses and/or Hubbard & Power, "The artist's toolbox":
1) Observe and make a record of how computer tools are used in actual classrooms or interact with people who have considerable experience in using the tools. (See options and contacts on course portal.) Your record could take the form of notes, interview, student work, sociograms, transcripts of audio- or videotape. If you have a specific concern or question to begin with, focus your observations and record around that. This will help you decide whether your note-taking will take a methodological, theoretical, or personal orientation (see Hubbard & Power).
2) Reflect on and analyze that experience in 500-1000 word report. If you didn't have a specific question or concern in part 1, use part 2 to come up with a question. Design future teacher research. Revise the report in response to my comments.

For A-D, Dialogue around written work [cM, uA, pR]
I try to create a dialogue with each student around written work, that is, around your writing, my responses, and your responses in turn. Central to this teaching/learning interaction are requests to "Revise and Resubmit." The idea is not that you make changes to please me the teacher or to meet some unstated standard, but that as a writer you use the eye of others to develop your own thinking and make it work better on readers. I may continue to request revision when I judge that the interaction can still yield significant learning--such a request does not mean your (re)submission was "bad." Even when the first submissions of written assignments are excellent, angles for learning through dialogue are always opened up.

In my comments I try to capture where the writer was taking me and make suggestions for how to clarify and extend the impact on readers of what was written. After letting my comments sink in, you may conclude that I have missed the point. In this case, my misreading should stimulate you to revise so as to help readers avoid mistaking the intended point. If you do not understand the directions I saw in your work or those I suggest for the revision, a face-to-face or phone conversation is the obvious next step--written comments have definite limitations when writers and readers want to appreciate and learn from what each other is saying and thinking. Please talk to me immediately if you do not see how you are benefitting from the "Revise and resubmit" process. I am still learning how to engage students in this given your various backgrounds and dispositions and my own.

Students should keep a copy of all typed assignments because I usually supply comments on a separate sheet and keep your original.

E. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings is expected, but allowance is made for other priorities in your life. I do not require you to give excuses for absence, lateness, or lack of preparation. Simply make up the 80% of participation items in other ways (F-J).

F. Professional Development Workbook [cL, cD, pCo, pR]
In your workbook keep records or products of homework tasks, assignments, and other reflections on the course and its objectives. Specific instructions for the tasks are provided in handouts. I do not expect all tasks to be completed, but you will learn as much in this course as you put into the class activities and homework. When you submit the PD workbook for perusal, I will let you know if you need to undertake more of the tasks. If you are using the workbook effectively and undertaking the homework tasks, the workbook should convey your developing process of practicing tools and critical thinking about course readings, activities, and discussions.

Homework Tasks [cL, pC, pCo].
include computer exercises designed so that you digest the ideas and practices you are introduced to, that is, incorporate them into your own thought and work. Other homework tasks are designed to engender a commitment to and capacity for ongoing professional development and building learning communities.

Clippings and E-clippings [cL]
The goal is that you get in the habit of keeping up with current developments and debates concerning technology in education (see Course objectives d and e). Include with your workbook relevant clippings or copies of articles from newspapers, magazines, journals, and websites (average one every two weeks). Make sure the full citation on each article is included. In your workbooks, include your own reflections on specific points in the articles you choose. For clippings you find on the web submit the URL and brief annotation to ed610clips@egroups.com. These can be viewed at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/ed610Clips. Use the search box to find clippings on specific topics.

G. Conferences
for discussion of comments on assignments (see Dialogue around written work, above), ideas for course projects, and the course as a whole. They are important to ensure timely resolution of misunderstandings.

H. Peer commentary [pCo]
After the draft report is completed I require you to comment on at least two other students' drafts. Send me a copy by email and/or include in PD workbook. Keep Elbow, Writing with Power, chapters 3 & 13 in mind when you decide what approaches to commenting you ask for as a writer and use as a commentator. In the past I made lots of specific suggestions for clarification and change in the margins, but in my experience, such suggestions led only a minority of students beyond touching up into re-thinking and revising their ideas and writing. On the other hand, I believe that all writers value comments that reassure them that they have been listened to and their voice, however uncertain, has been heard.

I. Assignment check-list [uA]
Please keep track of your assignments and revisions submitted and when they are returned marked OK/RNR. To gauge whether you are on track for at least a B+, simply note whether you have submitted 80% of the assignments by the dates marked and attended 80% of the classes.

J. Process review [cL, pR]
Identify 4-6 examples that capture the process of development of your work and thinking about computers, technology, and education. Journaling, freewriting, drafts, etc. may be included, that is, not simply your best products. Explain your choices in a 1-2 page cover note and through annotations (large post-its are a good way to do this). Submit with your PD workbook, or extract into a portfolio.

Other Teaching/Learning Tools
Rationale for the Assessment system [uA]
The rationale for grading the different assignments simply OK or R&R (revise & resubmit) and granting an automatic B+ for 80% satisfactory completion is to keep the focus of our teaching/learning interactions on your developing through the semester. It allows more space for students and instructor to appreciate and learn from what each other is saying and thinking. My goal is to work with everyone to achieve the 80% satisfactory completion level. Students who progress steadily towards that goal during the semester usually end up producing work that meets the criteria for a higher grade than a B+ (see rubrics). Use the Assignment Check-list to keep track of your own progress. Ask for clarification if needed to get clear and comfortable with this system.

Simulations and other class activities [uP]
Class activities, on and off the computer, are designed so that students participate in discovering the guidelines and other ideas I want to teach themselves. Specific descriptions of the activities are provided in handouts or during the class in question.

Learning Community and email group/list [cM, pC, pCo]
Individually and as a group, you already know a lot about using computers as tools and can help each other learn what you don't know. Moreover, you can learn a lot from each other and from teaching others what you know. The email group or list (emails sent to ed610@egroups.com) can be used to help the community develop.

Taking stock at end of semester involves multiple angles on course evaluation (including written evaluations during class, Process reviews and PD planning in your PD workbook): [uA]
a) to feed into your future learning (and other work), you take stock of your process(es) over the semester;
b) to feed into my future teaching (and future learning about how students learn), I take stock of how you, the students, have learned.

RUBRICS


Overall course grade. This rubric is simple, but unconventional. Read the Rationale in the Key Teaching/Learning Tools amd ask questions to make sure you have it clear.

B+ is earned automatically for 80% of Written items (=8 of 10, including Final Report) marked OK/RNR (=OK/ Revision-reflection-resubmission Not Requested) and 80% of Participation items fulfilled (=16 of 21).
The qualities below will determine whether a higher grade is earned. If you show half of the qualities to follow, you earn an A-. If you show almost all of these, you earn an A:

If you do not reach the B+ level, the grade for Written assignments & presentations will be pro-rated from B+ down to C for 50% of assignments OK/RNR. Similarly the Participation & process grade goes down to C for 50% of participation items.

Converting points to percentages to grades. Count each writing OK/RNR as 10 points up to a maximum of 80 and each participation item as 5 points up to a maximum of 80. Combine these points into a % grade = Writing points x2/3 + Participation points x 1/3. If your combined total is 80%, the rubric above is used to assign grades of B+, A-, and A. Below 80%, the minimum grade for B is 72.5%; for B- is 65%; for C+ is 57.5%; and for C is 50%.

Written assignments (10 assignment points each up to maximum of 80)
Each assignment will gain 10 points if marked OK/RNR (= Revision-reflection-resubmission Not Requested) meaning you have met almost all of the guidelines described in the section on Key teaching/Learning Tools (and summarized below), but Revision and Resubmission will be requested if you have not (0 points). Rationale for the assignments is conveyed in the Key Teaching/Learning tools section. Comments made as part of Dialogue around written work (see earlier in syllabus) provide guidance tailored to each student's specific interests and needs.

In addition to the specific rubric for each assignment, the following General Expectations apply:
All papers must be turned in during class typed on standard 8.5" x 11" paper, using at least 1" margins, a standard 10- or 12-point font such as Times or Helvetica, and (preferably) one and half line spacing. Do not submit work by email unless specifically arranged with the instructor.
The student's name, course number, assignment number, and date of writing or revising must appear on the first page at the top right. Subsequent pages must contain the student's name and the page number. Do not use a cover page.
Proofread your work for spelling, grammar, punctuation, and coherence of paragraphs. (Each paragraph should have one clear topic that is supported and/or developed by what is in it.) If writing is difficult for you, arrange peer or professional assistance -- do not expect the instructor to be your writing teacher.

A. Project
i. initial description. OK = Overview conveys 1. subject, 2. audience, and 3. your reason for working on this project. 4. Subject relates to the sound use of computers and educational technology. 5. One-two prose paragraphs (not bullets).
ii. notes on research and planning OK = 1. notes on your reading and your thinking organized to elicit comments; 2. show that you are finding out what others have been doing in your area of interest; 3. full citations (not just the URLs) recorded for your sources; 4. Updated overview; 5. Outline and/or annotated bibliography of readings done or planned.
iii. work-in-progress presentation OK= 13 minutes incl. 3-5 minutes of Q&A. ; 2. conveys the important features of work you have already done; 3. indicates where additional investigation or advice are needed and where you think that might lead you.
iv. complete draft. OK= 1. gets to the end to count, even if some sections along the way are only sketches; 2. not directed to the instructor, but conceived as something helpful to your teacher colleagues; 3. Grab readers' attention, Orient them, and move through Steps so that they appreciate the Position you have led them to and how it matches the subject of your project.
v. final report. OK= 1. 1200-2000 words; 2. bibliography of references cited; 3. revised in response to comments from instructor and peers on complete draft; 4. time allowed for the additional investigation and thinking that comments may entail.

B. Mini-essays (3 required). OK = 1. 200-400 words; 2. the course material--readings, activities, homework tasks--woven into your own thinking; 3. sources or support provided for views presented; 4. written as if the audience were other teachers, not only the instructor.

C. Group presentation evaluating software and software-based lesson OK = 1. active contribution to a10-15 minute group presentation to the class; 2. 200-500 word handout; 3. software plus lesson based on that software; 4. manageable evaluation rubric fashioned by the group; 5. reflects the insights of the different authors in the selection provided and elsewhere.

D. Report analyzing fieldwork observations. OK = 1. 500-1000 words; 2. based on observations made and recorded of how computer tools are used in actual classrooms or on interactions with people who have considerable experience in using the tools; 3. reflects on specific concern or question formulated in advance or through the fieldwork and writing; 4. future teacher research in this situation/area defined.

Participation items (5 participation points each one fulfilled up to maximum of 80)
E. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings. One item fulfilled for each class attended except NOT if you arrive late and have been more than 10 minutes late once or more before or if you are clearly unprepared/un-participating and have been so once before.
F. Professional Development (PD) Workbook. One item fulfilled if you submit your workbook for perusal week 6 or 7 and & another if you submit it in week 14 it shows you have been working consistently between classes on PD worksheets and homework tasks, making notes and reflections on readings, class discussions, clippings (including posting items on ed610Clips), and your individual project, etc.
G. In-office or phone conferences. One item fulfilled for each of two conferences on your assignments and project, one before week 6 and the other between then and week 12, except appointments missed without notifying me in advance count as a participation item not fulfilled.
H. Peer commentaries. One item fulfilled for commentaries on two other students' draft reports with copies submitted to PT.
I. Assignment Check-list. One item fulfilled if check-list is maintained and is submitted in week 12
J. Process Review. One item fulfilled if process review with 1-2 page cover note and 4-6 annotated examples that capture the process of development of your work and thinking is included with your PD Workbook at end-of-semester perusal.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(all readings on reserve in Healey)
Anon (1999). "Universal design: Ensuring access to the general education curriculum." Research Connections in Special Education 5(Fall): 1-8.

Becker, H. J. (1994). "A truly empowering technology-rich education--How much will it cost?" Educational IRM Quarterly 3(1): 31-35.

Cartier, J. L. and J. Stewart (2000). "A modeling approach to teaching high school genetics." BioQuest Notes 10(2): 1-4, 10-12.

de Castell, S., M. Bryson and J. Jenson (2001). "Object lessons: Critical visions of educational technology." http://www.educ.ubc.ca/faculty/bryson/ObjectLessons.html (viewed 8 Mar. 2001).

Eisenhart, M. A. and E. Finkel (1998). "Learning science in an innovative genetics course," in Women's Science: Learning and Succeeding from the Margins. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 61-90.

Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

Glantz, M. H. (1989). "Societal Responses to Regional Climatic Change," in M. H. Glantz (Ed.), Societal Responses to Regional Climatic Change: Forecasting by analogy. Boulder and London: Westview Press, Inc., 1-7, 407-428.

Hartford, K. (2000). American Politics and International Relations on the Internet: The Smart Student's Guide. Boston: McGraw Hill.

High Performance Systems, Inc. (1997). "Five learning processes: The role of systems thinking and the STELLA software in building world citizens for tomorrow," in STELLA: Introduction to System Thinking Guide. Hanover, NH: High Performance Systems.

Hubbard, R. S. and B. M. Power (1993). "The artist's toolbox: Strategies for data collection," in The Art of Classroom Inquiry: A Handbook for Teacher-Researchers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 9-49.

Kling, R. (Ed.), (1996). Computerization and Controversy, NY: Academic Press.

Kling, R. (1996). "Social controversies about computerization," in R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy. New York: Academic, 10-15.

Kraut, R., V. Lundmark, M. patterson, S. Kiesler, T. Mukopadhyay and W. Scherlis (1998). "Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvment and psychological well-being?" American Psychologist.

Meadows, D., D. L. Meadows, J. Randers and W. W. Behrens (1972). "The State of Global Equilibrium," in The Limits to Growth. New York, NY: Universe Books, 157-197.

Meyer, A. and D. H. Rose (2000). "Universal design for individual differences." Educational Leadership(November): 39-43.

Parker, I. (2001). "Absolute PowerPoint: Can a software package edit our thoughts?" The New Yorker(May 28): 76-87.
Peterson, N. S. and J. R. Jungck (1988). "Problem-posing, problem-solving, and persuasion in biology." http://www.bioquest.org/note21.html

Quinones, S. and R. Kirshstein (1998). "Self-evaluation rubrics for basic/advanced teacher computer use," in An Educator's Guide to Evaluating the Use of Technology in Schools and Classrooms. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement, 87-96. Available for free from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html (viewed 3 Sept. '01)

Richmond, B. (1993). "Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond." System Dynamics Review 9(2): 1-21.

Sclove, R. and J. Scheuer (1994). "For the architects of the Info-Highway, Some lessons from the Corporate Interstate" (http://www.amherst.edu/~loka/alerts/loka.1.6.txt; May 29, 1994). A slightly expanded version appeared as -----(1996) "On the road again? If information highways are anything like interstate highways--watch out!," in Kling, 606-612.

Snyder, T. (1994). "Blinded by science." The Executive Educator (March): 1-5

Taylor, P. J. (1997). "How do we know we have global environmental problems? Undifferentiated science-politics and its potential reconstruction," in P. J. Taylor, S. E. Halfon and P. E. Edwards (Eds.), Changing Life: Genomes-Ecologies-Bodies-Commodities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 149-162

Tom Snyder Productions (n.d.). Great Teaching with Technology: Resource Guide. Turkle, S. (1988). "Computational Reticence: Why women fear the intimate machine," 41-61 in C. Kramarae (Ed.), Technology and Women's Voices. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster, 9-26.

Van Gelder, L. (1996). "The strange case of the electronic lover," in Kling, 364-375.
Zhao, Y. and P. Conway (2001). "What's in, What's out: An analysis of state educational technology plans." Teachers College Record http://www.tcrecord.org(Jan. 27, viewed Aug. 16, 2001).