Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Teachers College Educational ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Derived Facts 0 1 Quick 88** 164** Note. The strategies are listed in the order of typical development. **significant at p < .001 Table 2: Strategy Use by Condition for Low Block (n = 23) Looking at the participants’ strategy use helps indicate why they are less accurate. Participants in the lowblock multiple-character condition are more likely to be using an advanced strategy (see Table 2). Given that they use an advanced strategy, they are not more likely to be accurate, but they are more likely to be near the answer on their first or second attempt (see Table 3). Score Exact Answer (on first attempt) Near Answer (+ or – 1 on first attempt) 3 Near on either attempt Single Multiple Single Multiple Single Multiple 0 841 877 830* 831* 815* 813* 1 148 178 159* 224* 174* 242* Note. A score of 1 indicates both use of an advanced strategy and meeting the column criteria, whereas 0 indicates a non-advanced strategy and/or not meeting the column criteria. * significant at p < .05 Table 3: Effective Use of Advanced Strategies by Condition for Low Block (n = 23) Discussion Improved performance on addition tasks should not be judged based on accuracy alone. A careful analysis of strategy use in conjunction with exact accurate and near accurate answers gives a more complete picture of children’s development. Looking at accuracy alone, the hypothesis that multiple characters improve addition performance would be rejected, especially for lower performing students. Yet also analyzing strategy and near accuracy reveals that multiple characters may be helping these lower performing students to take more risks and try out new, more advanced strategies. More research is needed to determine if taking risks in trying out new strategies helps students to become more accurate over time and to investigate why the multiple characters encourage these risks. References Baylor, A. L., & Ebbers, S. (2003). The pedagogical agent split-persona effect: When two agents are better than one. ED-MEDIA (pp. 1-5). Honululu, Hawaii. Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1984). The acquisition of addition and subtraction concepts in grades one through three. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15(3), 179-202. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computerbased teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213. Piaget, J. (1929). Introduction: Problems and Methods. The Childʼs Conception of the World. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Siegler, R. S. (1987). The Perils of Averaging Data Over Strategies : An Example From Children's Addition. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 116(3). White, B. Y., Shimoda, T. A., & Fredericksen, J. R. (2000). Facilitating students inquiry learning and metacognitive development through modifiable software advisers. In S. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools vol 2: No more walls (pp. 97-132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Guidelines for an Online Networking Space for Design Learning Pinar Ceyhan, Columbia University, 525 W. 120th St. New York, Email: pc2496@tc.columbia.edu Abstract: Tracing back to Ecole Des Beaux Arts design studio has always been central to design education. In design studio students learn from their peers, by the guidance of a master teacher (Broadfoot & Bennett, 2003). Since design education is built upon learning by doing within the design community at school, an Online Social Networking Space designed specifically for designers, replicating and extending the community in studio, has potential to enrich this experience. Furthermore, by connecting students with their peers, teachers, other institutions and professionals, within and outside of school regardless of their proximity to each other, it can also provide opportunities for an informal and lifelong learning. The goal of this research is to identify guidelines for a conceptual online networking space, enhancing design studio experience for explicit design learning to happen, while taking design pedagogy and the interaction offered by current design networking sites into consideration. Habraken (2007) identifies “good judgement” as what makes the final form in design, and design studio as the ideal setting to learn the art of good judgment. On the other hand, he criticizes the studio setting as being limited to the teacher's preferences, resulting in predominantly implicit teaching and imitative learning (Habraken, 2007). As they are developing their personal design vision at school, exposing students to different design perspectives can help avoiding imitative learning Habraken warns us about. Expanding Kamihira, Aoki & Nakano’s pedagogical model if students share their ideas and projects in a network of other students and designers, they will have the chance to get feedback and learn from a broader design community (Figure 1). An online-networked space, with a broader user profile from both academia and professional design community can extend the social context offered in the design studio, and introduce students to new ideas and points of view. Designing in remote collaboration has been explored as early as 1988 (Broadfoot & Bennett, 2003). The use of information and Communication Technologies enabled working on projects in Virtual Design Studios. Although successful collaborations were established, the medium posed challenges in establishing effective communication. Rapid developments in technology naturally rendered some of the earlier communication and presentation issues irrelevant today. Subsequently we see more studies on reflective and collaborative design learning, where online social networking is utilized as a communication and file-sharing platform (Kamihira, Aoki & Nakano, 2011). The research evaluated some of the earlier and recent studies conducted in design schools on designing in remote collaboration, in order to come up with guidelines for a networking platform where the main focus would be supporting design learning. In order to identify which features of current networking sites can support design education, and what other features can be implemented to support design learning, four websites; DeviantArt, Etsy, Design:Related and Design21: Social Design Network were examined. All four of the sites enable networking, showcasing art and design work, and job search. In addition to these, DeviantArt and Etsy also allow their members to sell their work online. Based on Maher, Paulini and Murty’s 2011 Analysis of Successful Collective Intelligence Table, these websites are assessed in representation of a Design problem and solution, communication and motivation (Table 1). The initial guidelines for an online social networking space for design learning are listed below: 1- Networking platform for design education should support reflective writing 2- Networking platform for design education should support archiving different kinds of file formats. 3- Networking platform for design education should support creating linkage among blog posts and work created, and allow sorting to display various connections made by the student. 4- Networking platform for design education should allow mobility. 5- Networking platform for design education should enlist the collaboration of independent API developers and companies creating digital tools for design. 4
Page 1 and 2: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Te
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents Math Strategies i
Page 5 and 6: Harnessing the Power of Emotionally
Page 7: Think Facts introduces four charact
Page 11 and 12: Mode S = Synchronous A=Asynchronous
Page 13 and 14: Investigating Potential Factors to
Page 15 and 16: Investigating the Effects of Choice
Page 17 and 18: Videogames in Institutional Practic
Page 19 and 20: Youth in the Digital Age: Digital M
Page 21 and 22: Augmenting The Arrival: Students’
Page 23 and 24: Connected to Word Problems: Improvi
Page 25 and 26: ased approach. Future research may
Page 27 and 28: MOOCs, Open Education, and Implicat
Page 29 and 30: Promoting Healthy Eating Habits Thr
Page 31 and 32: Figure 2: Monster Appetite in actio
Page 33 and 34: This year, the first participant gr
Page 35 and 36: Figure 2: The Aesthetigraph represe
Page 37 and 38: Digital Modeling Artifacts as Geome
Page 39 and 40: Using Weblogs to Increase Language
Page 41 and 42: Total 3 Advanced Performance Level
Page 43 and 44: “Media Literacy in Action: Using
Page 45 and 46: Learning Science Systems with Graph
Page 47 and 48: Liu, L., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (200
Page 49 and 50: Applying Physics to the Real World:
Page 51 and 52: Credibility of Culturally Situated
Page 53 and 54: notion that similarity with the use
Page 55 and 56: Duncan, H., Tan, J. (2012). A Visua
Page 57 and 58: Online Learning Environments in Hig
Page 59 and 60:
Exploration of concepts to facilita
Page 61 and 62:
Exploring the Intersection of Forma
Page 63 and 64:
Barab, S. & Squire, K. (2004). Desi
Page 65 and 66:
information and the world according
Page 67 and 68:
#phdchat: a community of practice o
Page 69 and 70:
A Difficult Balance: Regulating Cyb
Page 71 and 72:
References Bethel School District v
Page 73 and 74:
that children’s photographs were
Page 75 and 76:
A variety of data sources were coll
Page 77 and 78:
control and mastery increased in vi
Page 79 and 80:
Design of computer assisted tools f
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 2: Interactive functions of
Page 83 and 84:
User Experiences with Avatar Custom
Page 85 and 86:
Design Patterns for Promoting Self-
Page 87 and 88:
Cooperative Inquiry in Designing Te
Page 89 and 90:
Implications Our work with CI exten
Page 91 and 92:
References Allen, E., & Seaman, J.
show all

Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Teachers College Educational ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?