1 / 14

Social Thinking

Social Thinking. Expanding student engagement inside and outside the classroom through technology. Josh Yavelberg Art Institute of Washington. Showcase Reflect Critique Assess. ePortfolios. Model for Integration. Guidance. Guidance. Collaboration. Collaboration. Working Example.

weylin
Download Presentation

Social Thinking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social Thinking Expanding student engagement inside and outside the classroom through technology Josh Yavelberg Art Institute of Washington

  2. Showcase • Reflect • Critique • Assess ePortfolios

  3. Model for Integration Guidance Guidance Collaboration Collaboration

  4. Working Example

  5. Method • Adapted National Survey of Student Engagement • Added open ended questions relating to the course • Observation

  6. Participants • 39 of 65 students from 4 coures • Art History 1 (15 students) • History of Graphic Design (2 Sections) (34 Students) • Computer Applications (14 Students) • Institution and Demographic

  7. Results: NSSE Comparison

  8. Results: Positive Responses “I was never the one for Web interactions, but I ended up finding it to be at an advantage (in the means of teaching/learning method). It was nice to be able to see all of my classmates work and see how they interpreted each topic/project. So, to me, I found it to be enjoyable.” “As I stated on the last day, I truly admire the approach professor took in teaching the class. Using modern technology with the integration of the internet into the course and attempting to build a electronic social community amongst the students” “It is a great place to share opinions and get feedback. I like the idea about posting our work on line, because students can provide feedback at anytime not only during class.”

  9. Results: Negative Responses Although I understand the concept, I never felt comfortable submitting work through online resources. Maybe I am accustomed to submitting work in class and then discussing/critiquing during class as oppose to discussing/critiquing on an online forum. This was my first experience using online resources to submit work and it wasn't a very good one, hence my grade. Maybe it was my fault for not being able to get acclimated with the website.

  10. Limitations • Backyard • Differences of course content , time, and duration • Minimized use of portfolio concepts • Limited amount of participants and small number of respondents • Unequal distribution between varying courses • Not random design

  11. Conclusions • Technology has the chance to provide outcomes based learning that adapts to varying learning styles and provide evidence for assessment of student growth and engagement. • Majority of students are more engaged when accessing multiple modes of inquiry • More work needs to be done to develop the pedagogical models as well as train and support institutions

  12. Recommendations • Assessment of other data sources created by ePortfolios: • Level of Reflection • Useagestatistics • Rubrics • NSSE survey • Add questions • Adapt survey and compare with national data. • Longitudinal Study with more breadth could allow for random selection • Course ePortfolios

  13. Conclusions and Questions

  14. sites.google.com/site/yavelbergworkshops/ Y a v e l b h e s r o g J joshyavelberg@gmail.com

More Related