Epitome Subsequent Levels Indiana University Pla

Original Source Material

Student Version

Analysis of patterns in time (APT) is a method for gathering information about observable phenomena such that probabilities of temporal patterns of events can be estimated empirically. If appropriate sampling strategies are employed, temporal patterns can be predicted from APT results. Finally, APT is compared to the linear models approach and event history analysis. The major difference is that in APT there is no mathematical model assumed to characterize relations among variables. In APT the model is the temporal pattern being investigated.

References:
Frick, T. (1990). Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT): A Method of Recording and Quantifying Temporal Relations in Education. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 180-204.

APT is an empirical approach to observing and coding phenomena by using mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories within multiple classifications (Frick, 1990). Once these data have been collected, researchers specify APT queries to calculate the probability of joint and/or sequential patterns of interest. In effect, researchers create measures of temporal patterns by counting the occurrences of these coded patterns. According to Frick, Analysis of Patterns in Time is different from the linear models approach of measuring variables separately and using statistics to analyze their relations.

References:
Frick, T. (1990). Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT): A Method of Recording and Quantifying Temporal Relations in Education. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 180-204.

Original Source Material

Student Version

In a complex task such as creating a website for learning, instructors may want to support the generation of multiple solutions in learners’ peer feedback. Anonymity may create a social context where learners feel freer to express varied ideas, and make the task of giving feedback less inhibited. However, teachers need to know just how anonymity impacts the learning dynamic in order to make informed choices about when anonymous configurations are appropriate in peer feedback.

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers’ comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

Increased availability of technology in my classroom makes it easier for peer feedback activities to be conducted anonymously which “may create a social context where learners feel freer to express varied ideas, and make the task of giving feedback less inhibited” (Howard, Barrett, & Frick, 2010, p. 90). However, I worry that my students may be overly harsh if they don’t have to stand by their comments.

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers’ comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

Original Source Material

Student Version

The philosophical position known as constructivism views knowledge as a human construction. The various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. Instead, human knowledge, whether the bodies of content in public disciplines (such as mathematics or sociology) or knowledge of the individual learner, is a human construction.

References:
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

The philosophical position known as constructivismviews knowledge as a human construction. The various perspectives within constructivism are based on the premise that knowledge is not part of an objective, external reality that is separate from the individual. Instead, human knowledge is a human construction.

Original Source Material

Student Version

Learning is a complex set of processes that may vary according to the developmental level of the learner, the nature of the task, and the context in which the learning is to occur. As already indicated, no one theory can capture all the variables involved in learning.

References:
Gredler, M. E. (2001). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (4th Ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

A learning theory, there, comprises a set of constructs linking observed changes in performance with what is thought to bring about those changes.

References:
Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

A learning theory is made up of “a set of constructs linking observed changes in performance with whatever is thought to bring about those changes” (Driscoll, 2000). Therefore, since “learning is a complex set of processes that may vary according to the developmental level of the learner, the nature of the task, and the context in which the learning is to occur, it is apparent that no one theory can capture all the variables involved in learning” (Gredler, 2001).

Original Source Material

Student Version

To summarize, the elaboration model of instruction starts by presenting knowledge at a very general or simplified level in the form of a special kind of overview. Then it proceeds toadd detail or complexity in “layers” across the entire breadth of the content of the course (or curriculum), one layer at a time, until the desired level of detail or complexity is reached.

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-453). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

They soon switched to a model based on the elaboration theory (Reigeluth, 1999). Using this approach, the game would begin with a level that offered the simplest version of the whole task (the epitome); subsequent levels would become increasingly more complex–an approach common to videogames–with opportunities for review and synthesis.

References:
Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence decisions. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 425-453). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Original Source Material

Student Version

But what are reasonable outcomes of the influence of global processes on education?While the question of how global processes influence all aspects of education (and who controls these forces) is multidimensional and not completely testable, there appear to be some theories of globalization as it relates to education that can be empirically examined.

References:
Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D. (2009). Trends in TIMSS responses over time: Evidence of global forces in education? Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(2), 137-152.

The authors are not alone in asking “what are reasonable outcomes of the influence of global processes on education?” (p. 138). In fact, this same question provides the basis for the discussion that follows.

Original Source Material

Student Version

The lack of specific technology knowledge and skills, technology-supported pedagogical knowledge and skills, and technology-related-classroom management knowledge and skills has been identified as a major barrier to technology integration. Lack of specific technology knowledge and skills is one of the common reasons given by teachers for not using technology.

References:
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology
Research and Development, 55, 223-252.

There are many factors that can affect technology integration in schools. Hew and Brush (2007) state that the main factors to technology integration are the lack of specific technology knowledge and skills, technology-supported pedagogical knowledge and skills, and technology-related-classroom management knowledge and skills.

References:
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 223-252.

Original Source Material

Student Version

APT was compared with numerous extant methodologies, including the linear models approach and event history analysis. The fundamental difference between APT and these other approaches is that no particular mathematical model is assumed in APT. In APT a model is viewed simply as a temporal pattern, whereas in most other approaches parameters of a mathematical model are estimated from data in which variables are measured separately. Moreover, in APT probabilities of temporal patterns are estimated by relative frequency and duration.

References:
Frick, T. (1990). Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT): A Method of Recording and Quantifying Temporal Relations in Education. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 180-204.

In this study, Frick (1990) clarified the distinction between statistical linear models and Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT). Compared to the linear models approach (which includes particular mathematical models), APT is a straightforward way to create temporal maps and analyze them for recurring patterns of events. Moreover, in APT probabilities of temporal patterns are estimated by relative frequency and duration of those events.

References:
Frick, T. (1990). Analysis of Patterns in Time (APT): A Method of Recording and Quantifying Temporal Relations in Education. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 180-204.

Original Source Material

Student Version

While solitary negative reactions or unjustified suggestions for change have the potential to dissipate discourse rather than build it, the pattern analysis shows that the anonymous condition seemed to provide a safe explorative space for learners to try out more reasons for their multiple solutions. Teachers will rarely give anonymous feedback, but the experience of giving anonymous feedback may open a social space where learners can try out the reasons for their suggestions.

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers’ comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

In their study of anonymity in an online peer feedback activity, the authors found that, under conditions of anonymity, learners seemed more inclined to provide reasons to back up their suggestions (Howard, Barrett, & Frick, 2010). Getting both suggestions and the reasons for the suggestions would be welcome in feedback I receive from peers or my instructors. Seeing the reasons would help me know that the suggestions have been thought through (even if I don’t always agree with them).

References:
Howard, C. D., Barrett, A. F., & Frick, T. W. (2010). Anonymity to promote peer feedback: Pre-service teachers’ comments in asynchronous computer-mediated communication. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(1), 89-112.

Original Source Material

Student Version

The goal of instruction for the behaviorist is to elicit the desired response from the learner who is presented with a target stimulus. To accomplish this, the learner must know how to execute the proper response, as well as the conditions under which that response should be made. Therefore, instruction is structured around the presentation of the target stimulus and the provision of opportunities for the learner to practice making the proper response.

References:
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.

According to behaviorism, instruction should provide necessary stimulus in order for learners to produce desired response. It is important that the learner must know how to execute the proper response under the required conditions in order to produce the desired response (Ertmer & Newby, 1993). Instruction should provide learner with opportunities that the learner practice to elicit the desired outcome.

References:
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-71.