Archive for the ‘Instruction’ category

Highlights from BCC’s Technology in the Classroom Showcase

April 29th, 2011

Yesterday, faculty and staff from around BCC’s campus participated in the third annual Technology in the Classroom Showcase. The event provided a way for faculty to share and discuss the many ways they have made use of technology in their instruction and was organized by Albert Robinson of the Office of Instructional Technology (OIT) at BCC.

In his opening remarks, Howard Wach, Director of OIT, commented that in all of the presentations that would take place that day, we could see that it was the teaching objectives that led the technology uses and decisions. Moreover, as the availabilities of technologies has grown, Blackboard has become but one aspect of a much larger universe of online learning. Capitalizing on the increasing openness of classrooms to technology, keynote speaker Dan Cygielman, the Apple Account Executive for NYC higher education markets, presented a number of ways that the iPad is influencing education. He highlighted such apps as ibooks, Inkling, Dragon dictation, Garageband, and others.

Victor Rodriguez started the day by showing how Blackboard has helped streamline the content delivery of BCC’s Freshman Orientation (OCD) course. Kate Culkin, from the History department, follwed by presenting how she used ePortfolios to revise the Hall of Fame for Great Americans assignment from History 20. By opening options for her students to make more use of “local history” that was connected to, but not limited by, the Hall of Fame, Culkin found that the flexibility encouraged students to explore other parts of the city and develop a sense of audience while they simultaneously became public historians. Also presenting on ePortfolios, Julia Miele Rodas, from the English department, discussed how she witnessed and encouraged her students’ sense of ownership and agency in writing by using the ePortfolios. She traced the different ways in which very differen students began with a “traditional” paper assignment and deveoped it in the ePortfolio platform.

These morning sessions also brought up important questions about scaffolding ePortfolio and digital assignments. Part of the appeal of such assignments is that they allow for flexibility and creativity of expression. But, as many of the presenters and audience members pointed out, students often approach such openness with anxiety, at first. Thus, a discussion formed around providing a structure that provided guidance in the beginning but allowed the student to move away from the structure as they became more comfortable with the technology and mode of expression.

Two of the presentations were particularly applied in focus. The Automotive Technology Program, represented by Vincenzo Rigaglia, George Patchoros, and Alin Szabo, showed off how they have been able to use wireless diagnostic equipment to help students learn about the intricate computer systems existing in automobiles today. As they pointed out, using technology in their program is not a luxury, it is a necessity. Their students are expected to comprehensively understand this technology so that they can accurately and efficiently work with automobiles. Also focusing on the applied aspect of technologies, Sunil Bhaskaran, from the Chemistry department, presented on the importance of teaching with Geospatial technologies. Aside from helping students assess real-world issues, such as flood-zones and population density, bringing GIS to BCC has resulted in a number of career opportunities and collaborations with campuses around the world.

Focusing on the more practical side of things, three afternoon presentations showcased specific applications and how they were easing content delivery and mastery for students. Sara Holtzschue from Art and Music showed how iTunesU provides a way of disseminating music tracks for students to listen to that accompany their textbook readings. The platform is easily accessible and familiar and students enjoy using it. Paula Green, from the Department of Nursing and Allied Health Sciences, demonstrated her use of the group-calling function to hold evening office-hours for students. Specifically focusing on those students who scored poorly on the first exam of the semester, Professor Green used the weekly group calls as a chance to allow students to lead their own study groups that she could help facilitate, if necessary. The students showed marked improvement on the next quiz (all scored in the 80s) and are all currently passing her course. Finally, Rujin Tian from Biology showed how she has used BCC’s faculty media server to upload video demonstrations for her students to repeatedly watch and listen to. By using video demonstrations in class, she is able to pause and answer student questions related to clinical technique without interrupting what would otherwise be a realtime demonstration. The constant access to videos also allows students to have opportunities to repeatedly view and/or practice the handson components of their courses.

Overall, the day was a success and provided a way for faculty from across the campus to see how their colleagues were using technologies in different ways. Everything from practice to pedagogy was discussed and we’re looking forward to seeing what faculty have to present next year.

BCC Faculty Showcase 4-28

April 11th, 2011

The Third Annual Bronx Community College faculty technology showcase will be held on Thursday, April 28, from 9:30am to 2pm. Please join us for all or part of the day if you can. BCC faculty will be demonstrating instructional applications in geospatial and automotive technologies, multimedia integration, and ePortfolios. And that ain’t all…

You can register for the event here, and you can view or download the event flyer here. Refreshments will be served and a good time will be had. For information, directions, or any other questions, contact Albert Robinson at 718-289-5100, x3063, or albert.robinson@bcc.cuny.edu.

Open-textbooks from FlatWorld Knowledge

March 17th, 2011

Eric Frank, President of FlatWorld Knowledge, spoke today in the BCC English Department meeting and showcased the work they are doing around open textbooks. This is something that is gaining ground at BCC, as our very own Susan Amper described in a recent post.
Flat World Knowledge: Open College Textbooksphoto © 2010 opensource.com | more info (via: Wylio)

He explained how they have attempted to take the best of the publishing world and the best of open-source ideas to create “sustainable open textbooks” — texts that are peer-reviewed, come with supplemental materials and instructor guides but at little to no cost to students. I found myself puzzled as to how this is at all possible. In a nutshell, they have set up a system where all content is available for free via the web, but students can pay for different formats if they choose. While 44% of the 115,000 students who have used the service so far have read the content free online, 56% have purchased one of the other options (ereader version, pdf printout, etc.). The purchases of these 56% balance the whole endeavor out to about $20 per student. So, for Introduction to Psychology, the purchase options include a print-it-yourself .pdf version for $24.95 (individual chapters are $1.99), a soft-cover bound version shipped to the student for $35-70 (depending on B/W or color), an eBook version for $24.95 (Sony, nook, iPad), and extra study aids for $14.95. Faculty adopters can either adopt a text themselves and leave it up to the students to select and pay for the options they want or the institution can purchase a “site” agreement that would cover any material the student wanted for $20 per student. 

There are currently 37 titles, many of them are in business and math, but they have 107 authors signed who, Frank said, represent approximately 80 textbook projects. So more titles are constantly being developed. 

What appealed to me most about the presentation was the editing aspect. You can edit any part of any book. And the editing isn’t limited to picking and choosing which chapters appear. It is line-by-line editing capability. You can also engage digital media by easily by embedding YouTube clips and other links into the “text.” After you make changes they are formatted to appear seamlessly integrated to the text. While the original author retains copyright and receives royalties based on their text, your additions, if they were to become adopted, would also allow you a slice of the royalty pie, so to speak. As I understood it, if I were to write an additional chapter for the Introduction to Psychology textbook, something about critical psychology or social justice, for example, that could eventually be adopted and I would retain the rights to that information. I would imagine this is something that will have to be constantly negotiated, but it seemed promising. Potential royalties aside, the chance to manipulate content so that it meets the specific needs of your course/students/school is invaluable, especially for busy grad students and adjuncts who may not know where to begin when they are assigned a new class. An arrangement like this would give us the chance to select a text, work with it, add to it and provide it to our students for extremely little cost. 

There are, of course, other open textbook alternatives. The Community College Consortium for Open Educational Resources provides a valuable starting point, if you’re interested in learning more. As well as the College Open Textbooks site. Additionally, Baruch College has just partnered with Flatworld, so we’ll get to see how that relationship develops in real-CUNY-time! 

What do you think? Revolutionary way to deliver customized content and save students mountains of money or too good to be true? I’m optimistic (for once).

Blended Learning at BCC: Improving pass rates with ‘multifarious instructional design’

March 4th, 2011

As part of the Title V work going on at BCC, Professor Kenya Harris and the team of nursing instructors are making use of VoiceThread, Twitter and a number of other Web 2.0 tools to make their courses more interactive. The results are really impressive.

In a recently published article, Prof. Harris reports an improvement in pass rate of 30% since she began incorporating technology into her course design. How has she done it?

Building on the idea of blended learning Prof. Harris has stopped lecturing in her courses, opting to capitalize on face-to-face time by engaging the students in “active learning” activities that build on the content they review on their own out-of-class time. All of her lectures are available to the students via Podcasts, Videocasts and PowerPoint slides, which students are expected to review prior to class. This is particularly helpful for language learners, who can listen to a lecture numerous times. If they have questions on the material Prof. Harris has set up a “muddiest points” forum on her Blackboard course page that allows students to post their questions in the forum. Other students are often the first to respond and Prof. Harris moderates the comments and joins the conversation.

This “multifarious instructional design” as Harris calls it, let’s students master the content in their own learning style (they can use the slides, podcasts, read texts, etc.) and bring that mastery into class where she engages them in activities that build on the content, such as simulation and role-play. This is especially important for nursing students, who will be responsible for conveying medical terminology to their patients. Students report that they find these activities more engaging and exciting and the data supports her efforts. Pass rates improved 30% over the course of just three semesters, as she increasingly implemented her techniques.

In another recently published article, Gerald Bergtrom of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee documents transitioning a Cell Biology course from traditional face-to-face to a blended environment. He documents the step-by-step process and used a process similar to Harris’s — content delivery and mastery was aided by technology and occurred outside the classroom so that classroom time could be spent on more “meta” activities that actively engaged students with the content.

Both instructors are capitalizing on the “asynchronous” online discussions and interactions that can fortify content delivery and boost the level of in-class activities. For me, these ideas completely shifted/challenged how I normally thought of out-of-class time and what I expected my students to be doing with that time. They also highlight the role that technologies available on a variety of platforms and Blackboard, such as discussion boards and blogs, have in these out-of-class interactions. Finally, it is refreshing to see that they are having success with students actually doing what they are expected to do on their own and taking responsibility for their own learning because they are ready to actively engage when they come to class.

What a Wonderful World it Would Be: Open Textbooks at Bronx CC

December 16th, 2010

Think of it: students can lower their debt, enhance their chances for success, take more classes, and graduate sooner.

Teachers can have more engaged students, better passing rates, and more flexibility with the course materials.

Let’s throw in the bonus of helping to save the planet.

I am not describing the future. This is now.

How can we accomplish all this? It’s easy. We offer every student at CUNY free textbooks. At the CUNY IT Conference on December 3rd, I presented on the topic of open textbooks to a standing room only crowd with about a dozen people forced to stand in the hallway trying to catch some of what was said.

As we all know, the exorbitant cost of college textbooks is crippling CUNY’s mission to bring higher education to striving New York City students. Students at CUNY community colleges spend, on average, $1,000 per year on textbooks—an amount equal to 34% of their tuition. Faced with such costs, many students reduce their course loads, slowing their progress toward their degrees, and—too often—leading them to drop out. Some 50% of students enrolled in classes try to get by without purchasing the costly textbooks, here again lowering their chances for success. Community colleges, both here in New York and across the country, see the results in distressingly low completion rates.

We can expect no help from the profit-driven textbook industry. In seven years textbook prices rose 186%–double the rate of inflation.

But, we don’t need their help.

Here are just two examples of how we can work without a bookstore.

Introduction to Economic Analysis is being used at Harvard, NYU, Caltech, and I can’t tell you how many other colleges and universities. It was written by R. Preston McAfee, recently of Caltech, who has held four endowed chairs in economics. This book is available to students, online . . . FREE. (A printed copy will cost students $15.20)

Collaborative Statistics written Barbara Illowsky & Susan Dean, used at Emory, Virginia Tech, SUNY Purchase, and elsewhere is also online free.

Today there are thousands of these textbooks, in virtually every subject area, written by eminent scholars, professionally edited, widely reviewed, and available to students online at no cost. These Open Educational Resources (OER) offer a real, lasting solution to the textbook problem CUNY has recognized and grappled with.

Open Educational Resources offer not an acceptable substitute for traditional textbooks, but texts that are actually superior in important ways.

First, they are easy to use. Students can read the text in various formats. Highlight and make notes. Print a page they want, several pages–the entire book, if they wish. Convenient text features include vocabulary words that automatically link to their definitions, so students don’t have to thumb through a glossary in the back of the book. There are even adaptive features for students with disabilities.

Second, these textbooks open a new world of flexibility for teachers. Instructors can choose the best chapters from different texts—why not since they all are free? Until now teachers have often passed up valuable materials, because they couldn’t justify having students buy a whole book when they’re only going to use a small portion of it.

Teachers can also modify the contents of open texts. Change parts, add related materials from elsewhere. Revise text to emphasize particular points, make it more accessible or relevant to their students’ experiences.

We need to expand this effort here at CUNY. And then we need to move from generating support for the concept—which is easy—to the difficult work of implementation. Adopting new textbooks is a major undertaking. Researching the books themselves is very time-consuming: as I mentioned, there are thousands. The ability to combine and/or modify the books complicates the process further. If books are to be adopted department-wide, a committee must do the work together; consensus must be built.

Funding is needed to enable faculty to take on this work. Importantly, this funding, unlike annual funds to abate textbook costs, is temporary. Once free textbooks are adopted, they’re free—for one class of students after another. And once teachers discover what they can do with open resources, I cannot imagine their ever going back.

I am seeking funding from the NYC Council to whom I spoke as part of the CUNY contingent on 11/29, and also from CUNY to implement a pilot program at Bronx CC.

I close with the words of Thomas Jefferson, words I have read in three different publications in just the last week: “The field of knowledge is the common property of mankind.” That vision—which is the vision that inspirits the City University of New York—is today, as never before in history, a living reality. Today, NYC students, for whom textbooks costs have been a crushing burden, can start using world class textbooks—for FREE.

What a wonderful world it can be.

CUNY IT Conference Day 1

December 4th, 2010

Friday marked my first time attending the CUNY IT conference, and it was definitely interesting. Having only attended academic or grad student conferences I was surprised by the size, the suits, and all the vendors. The sessions were filled with lots of useful information and even the occasional heckler (who knew?!). Below are notes from just the sessions I attended, hopefully others will post about other sessions since there were so many at the same time that looked great. Below is my summary of day 1, looking forward to day 2 at The Grad Center.

ePortfolios Across CUNY: Aggregating and Integrating Information

Barbara Walters, Joe Ugoretz, Sarah Morgano and our own Howard Wach presented an opening session on the experiences of ePortfolio use and development on their campuses. Barbara outlined a set of “Universal Concerns” that any school/program/instructor interested in implementing EPortfolios would have to consider. Joe and Howard gave a history of ePortfolio development at Macaulay Honors College and Bronx Community College, respectively. And Howard brought up the interesting point that ePortfolios are much more of a pedagogical concept than just a technology.

All of the presenters have worked hard on a public Commons wiki page for ePortfolios. As with all wikis, they depend on collective upkeep, so if you have resources to add as you’re browsing their thorough collection of links I’m sure they and others would appreciate it!

The big questions that came out of this session: Is there any one-size-fits-all model of ePortfolio that will work across the CUNY campuses? (I know, rhetorical, but still useful) What does the “E” add to the concept of a portfolio? How do you prepare faculty for using ePortfolios? And, of course, the always-present-even-if-not-spoken-aloud question of assessment: how can we use ePortfolios to assess both individual learning and programmatic development?

Resources: Commons ePortfolio wiki page, AAEEBL, Bronx’s ePortfolio resource page

Blogs, ePortfolio and Assessment in the Majors: Pedagogies and Rubrics in Three Programs

Michael Cripps, Xin Bai and Michael Smith gave a great presentation on their experiences with blogs and ePortfolios. My notes are a little lacking because I entered late (tremendously long lunch line) and had no outlet for my limping laptop (note to self: charge laptop fully before tech conferences, doh!).

I came in just in time to see Michael Cripps showing how his students have used blogs differently, including a really creative use of a fiction blog, in which a student blogs from the perspective of a young woman who has survived a zombiepocalypse and found a computer on which to chronicle her experience. What a great way to see how students can take a technology in a direction you might never have thought. Cripps also showed blogs that were for a specific project juxtaposed with the same student’s more general ePortfolio. I found this to be a great example of how blogs can provide a more “messy” (in a good way) writing workspace for the nuts and bolts development and discussion and the final products can be shared in a portfolio, which is even then still developing over the course of the students’ education. It’s like viewing a digital spiral or concentric circles of writing, learning, development and identity.

Xin Bai presented on using ePortfolios as a way for teaching education students to meet NCATE requirements. This is definitely a great use of ePortfolios that I’ve seen before. ePortfolios seem particularly useful for applied fields where students need to graduate with a display of core competencies. At BCC we’ve seen a lot of success with this in our Media Technology program. It also made me wish I was preparing an ePortfolio for my job market package instead of the generically presented b/w teaching and research statements. Surely a search committee would find an ePortfolio more interesting and I know it would reflect more of “me” than my little blue folders and linen paper.

The issue of students needing a visible display of their talents/competencies was a point also raised by Michael Smith in his presentation of the great student work happening at York. But one of the most poignant moments came when Smith reminded us that Blackboard gives students practically zero control over their own work at the end of the semester (unless they happen to export it all). As instructors we know that learning is developmental and cumulative, so why would we use a software that requires all evidence of the work that took place, especially the collaborative and process-based work to be closed after the finals are in? Of course there are distinct advantages of both platforms, but this is an important question to consider.

Finally, out of the comments and discussion came reference to the great work being done at Baruch when Luke Waltzer mentioned Tom Harbison’s very impressive collaborative Modern American History course blog.

Facts (and Myths) about Student Perceptions and Use of Technology

In a completely packed house (many of us sat on the floor), Queens college faculty members Michelle Fraboni, Eva Fernandez and Nancy Foasberg presented findings from a student technology survey. They opened by juxtaposing student sentiments toward technology use in the classroom with their self-reports of their own technology savviness in sometimes contradictory ways. For instance, some students who are tech savvy report not wanting much technology use in their classrooms. Others, who may be more skeptical about technology report wanting more online course offerings. The presentation was helpful in that it reminded us that students we perceive as digital “natives” or digital “immigrants” may have very different ideas of what they want out of the classroom and their learning experiences.

For me this brought up two questions. First, the obvious, how should this finding shape the choices we make in the classroom about the technology we use? Second, I think many of us assume that it is important to use technology in the classroom to improve our students’ “information technology literacy” — but if students are seeing their school and personal “tech” lives as distinct, should we reexamine our expectations on how the tech in the classroom makes its way into their daily tech lives?

Finally, part-way through I found myself wishing the presenters would compare the QC sample with the recent ECAR report, since I was thinking that QC students are of course quite different than other samples. They didn’t disappoint! They presented percentage comparisons between the two samples and the QC and ECAR samples were actually quite similar. Though questions were raised about recruitment methods and sample size, it was still interesting to see yet another common assumption brought up for questioning in light of contradictory data. I guess we don’t always know what we think we know about students and technology.

(The full presentation of slides are available here.)

Peer Mentoring: A Catalyst for Faculty Innovation

Rounding out a day of helpful sessions, TE(A)CH’s own Moronke Oshinmartin, Charles Alston, Albert Robinson, Laura Broughton, Giulia Guarnieri and Stephen Powers gave a great presentation about peer mentoring. What really stood out to me in their presentation was how mentoring can grow organically when the stage is set with a blended model that breaks down any sort of hierarchy and instead focuses on knowledge and enthusiasm. They documented how faculty members go through training and then become peer mentors themselves but they also showcased their innovative Instructional Technology Tutors (ITT) program that trains students to be technology assistants for faculty members and their student peers. Their model exemplifies the kind of collaborative development where all parties benefit from the process. But, of course, I might be a little biased. 🙂

Some great resources came out of their presentation including: Voicethread, Scribblar, Audacity, CamStudio, Windows Movie Maker. I couldn’t write them all down because I was busy snapping photos, so if I left some out please add them in the comments.

All in all it was a long but very useful day. It was also interesting to see the different worlds of CUNY IT converge in one space. As someone who tends to work on focused projects with a few faculty members I didn’t quite have an appreciation for the scale of technology at the institutional level, the administrative and security concerns, and the number of other folks who are considering the same questions from different perspectives. That was certainly helpful to see. My only disappointment was in not walking away with one of the many (and, frankly, pretty decent) raffle prizes. *sigh*

Your Writing Process: Reflecting and Modeling for Students

November 30th, 2010

Last week, yes, just last week, I began thinking about my own processes of research and writing and what my responsibility was as an instructor to model these practices for my students. In the week since, a series of articles, blog posts, tweets, late night flashes of insight, etc. has left me with the realization that this can’t all be settled in a single blog post (darn!). I would, however, like to get a conversation going that has three prongs: 1) what do you use to aggregate digital information; 2) how do you engage in writing, from quick jots to assembling full manuscripts; and 3) how do you or should you share these with your students?

Each of these “prongs” warrants multiple blog posts on their own. But my point here is to delineate my process and consider how I could/should share this with students (and even faculty) that I work with to help them develop and understand their own process of gathering information and writing about it. I think one common pitfall in using technology in the classroom is that we just assume we’re dealing with a group of “digital natives” who are skilled in all things tech. However, I think a major responsibility in using tech in the classroom is to discuss process in order to help your students achieve greater technology and information literacy.
1. Keeping track of it all (RSS, GoogleReader, Del.icio.us, Evernote, Instapaper)
The process of keeping track of the constant flow of digital information, much less organizing it into coherent thoughts, is a bit of an ongoing and ever-changing mystery to me. Rather than investigate the millions of options out there, I’ll outline a bit of my own process. It sometimes feels redundant, but I’ve tried to streamline it as much as possible by making sure that much of it stays in the cloud and syncs across devices. For subscribing to websites I use GoogleReader and have sites sorted into folders. Many journals provide RSS updates that I have in specific folders as well (but more on keeping up with journals in a future post). GoogleReader is available from any internet connection and it syncs to my phone through Reeder. When I find something useful I tag it in del.icio.us. Admittedly, I’ve been playing with Evernote lately and am thinking it might eclipse this step, but the tagging features in del.icio.us are hard to beat. For those things I know I want to read but gosh they’re just too long (!) I send them to Instapaper and save them for long commutes or the rare transfer-to-Kindle (which is admittedly a bit wonky but I don’t have my hands on an iPad…YET).
2a. Writing Helpers: Assembling and Jotting (750words, Penzu, Evernote)
As a former faithful user of Journler I was dismayed to hear it had ceased development. Forced to find another simple but flexible software for collecting my thoughts, meeting notes, scribbles, etc. I began looking around the net, hoping to find something that was cloud-based. For personal writing and journaling there’s 750words.com which counts down the words and then provides a loose text analysis when you’re finished. It is premised on the idea that simply sitting in the chair and forcing out 750 words can do wonders for your writing process. Penzu, premised on a similar idea, also touts the claims of improved mental health. Penzu’s approach seems to be a bit more flexible and organizable compared to 750’s minimalist approach. Both are private, which can be particularly reassuring to students who may want to write online but aren’t quite ready for the public leap of the blog.
I’ve recently been exploring Evernote (I know, late to the party) and it is proving helpful in bridging the above processes (keeping track, assembling, and jotting, and the next step, actual writing). I like that I can plunk links in my little notebooks, sync them across practically ANY web-enabled device, access it from my home Macs and school PCs, and, when the mood strikes, compose little sentences and summaries around my snippets of digital info. I’m still getting the hang of it, but this Evernote thing might just be where it’s at.
2b. Writing helpers: For those thoughts longer than a jot (Scrivener)
But what about when you’re ready to actually compose thoughts into paragraphs or — gasp — pages? I began exploring these options when I started writing my dissertation and found the glare of a blank Word document particularly horrifying. And crippling. I’m actually composing this (lengthy) blog post in Evernote, but I’ve found my dissertation, job market materials, and article manuscripts to come together well in Scrivener. [Note: Mac only (Update: Windows Beta available and official launch in January!  and not-free, though educational license available.] Originally designed for screen-writing (but updated recently to include APA and other templates), Scrivener provides movable and sortable pages, split screen viewing, full-screen writing mode and — to the delight of my school-girl-writing-a-research-paper-with-index-cards-and-Encyclopedia-Brittanica days — a corkboard with index cards! I’ve been using Scrivener to take the notes and scribbles from the other services and assemble them into somewhat flowing documents. When it seems to make enough sense and actually totals a fair amount of pages, I can easily export my scrivener file to a Word document. All of a sudden that white page is not staring blankly at me but is filled with words that, if I’m lucky, reach a healthy page count.
3. From Process to Practice: Reflexivity in Teaching
So, those are my ways of weeding through information, keeping track of those half thoughts that might develop into full thoughts and bringing them together into a coherent whole. But now to the crux of the matter. If it has taken me years of practice, months of trial-and-error, and (at least) a week of very concentrated thinking to suss out my own process, what do we expect from our students? What is our role, as technologically engaged and savvy instructors, to help our students find their way through not only the plethora of information available but the tools that can help them organize and *write*? I’ll never forget showing my students GoogleReader and explaining to them what an “RSS” was. I thought some of their heads might explode — they were so excited! I was stunned they didn’t know about this basic technology, but if you’re primarily using Facebook and iTunes and occasionally wrestling with EbscoHost, then why would you?
This served as a lesson for me: that I shouldn’t assume my students are engaging with current events or academic material in any certain way or that they understand how technology can help them keep up and keep track.
From that point on I tried to model my steps, when time allowed, to help them see my own process.
Which leads me to my concluding questions: Do you model your own practices/processes for your students? How have they responded? Do you think it is your responsibility to do so? Please feel free to answer in the comments, pose more questions. And, as always, tips on how to streamline my process or other techy-helpers are appreciated.
css.php
Need help with the Commons? Visit our
help page
Send us a message
Skip to toolbar