PPEL - Final Work

To compile my annotated bibliographie I've create a site where I put all the work I made and done some final reflections. I've also linked to a wix where I compile my learning objects.

My site is here.

PPEL - My Learning Objects

In this wix I've compiled my Learning Objects. This wix is going to be part of a PPEL - Final work site. This is only an image. You've to go here.

PPEL - Debate

Olá colegas mepelianos. Coloco aqui algumas indicações sobre o debate  e suas regras:


O debate é uma situação tipicamente argumentativa em que alguém defende uma causa ou expõe as suas razões a favor duma tese sobre questões ou situações que envolvam um confronto de ideias. Um debate tem os seguintes momentos:


. Discussão da(s) tese(s);


. Confronto de argumentos;


. Assumpção de posições devidamente justificadas.

Por isso saber participar num debate, quer a nível comportamental ou das atitudes que ao nível linguístico e lógico – argumentativo, é uma das competências exigidas pela Filosofia.



Regras para um debate:

A nível comportamental:

1) Saber ouvir e estar aberto aos argumentos dos outros;

2) Apresentar argumentos precisos e claros;

3) Justificar as posições com argumentos válidos, apoioados, sempre que possível, em provas factuais;

4) Intervir só se tiver algo a dizer, evitando argumentos já usados;

5) Aceitar como princípio que os outros podem ter razão, admitindo alterar a sua própria posição;

6) Evitar a agressividade e o ataque pessoal, aceitando que é mais importante o esclarecimento que a discussão possibilita, do que a vitória no debate.


A nível argumentativo respeitar:

1) As regras da gramática;

2) As regras da lógica e / ou da reórica.


As regras da lógica (do discurso coerente)

1) Fazer afirmações ou negações (proposições) justificadas racionalmente;

2) Não usar contradições, isto é, não defender simultaneamente uma tese e a sua negação;

3) Fazer inferências válidas, isto é, usar argumentos cuja conclusão decorra de premissas verdadeiras;

4) Usar argumentos consistentes, isto é, cuja conclusão decorra de premissas verdadeiras;

6) Respeitar as regras de construção de argumentos válidos.


Regras da Retórica (do discurso persuasivo)

1) Fazer afirmações credíveis ou sustentáveis;

2) Recorrer a argumentos defendidos por autoridades reconhecidas;

3) Usar uma linguagem apelativa e recorrer a figuras de estilo (metáforas, alegorias, analogias, etc.).


Bom trabalho!

PPEL - Review AB and LO (Activity 3, Task 3)

For this task we have to do a review from an LO and an AB.

Annotated Bibliography

In general I learn lots of things about my colleagues and they give me ideas to do my own work. However I think that the use of videos and images (I’m also included in here) should be review and if we don’t know if they are Open Resources (Educational or others) or not and if we don’t know who is the author so, I think that is a good idea to put the site where that resource was.

About AB I’ll review Margarida Marmeleira and Alberto Cardoso work because they present 2 types of AB.

1) Alberto Cardoso AB – in fact this AB show us an evolution to the meaning of transparency process trough questions. This is very positive, but I couldn’t understand what was the bibliography used, so I think that in this AB Alberto should put the Bibliography in the first paragraph or, when he’s going to talk about something he should mention what are the sources. I also think that is a great idea if Alberto put some conclusion in his work (in the final) to gives us the perception from what was the most important in the contents of the AB (but this is only my opinion).

2) Ana Marmeleira AB – I liked the experimental cases of transparency that was given; she describes what transparency is (in general) but doesn’t present tools (only e-portfolio) that show us online transparency. In this case I think that Margarida should give examples of other tools and, like I say in Alberto Cardoso AB the idea of doing a conclusion in the final it give us a general vision of what she learn about AB.

 

Learning Objects

In fact there weren’t so much new tools used like in Activity 2. In this Activity there were lots of people using Xtranormal and Go!Animate. I don’t know work with this tools but I think the second give us more interactivity whit the different scenarios and the personages that we can put in them (I’m remember Carla Maria Elias LO from activity 1); the first tool (xtranormal) is a little bit less interactive (the personage only does monologues, but they don’t move hands or made movements).

About LO I’ll review Carla Maria Elias and Alberto Cardoso work

1) Carla Maria Elias LO – I think a great idea chose Larry King and Sarah Palin to an interview (with xtranormal); however I think that the personages should be more interactive, they could do gestures with their hands and they should move a little bit more (I don’t know if it is possible) or put other images that interact whit the spectator.

2) Alberto Cardoso LO – Alberto does 3 LO and it show us the development of its capacity to work with videos (making videos). In the first one he shows a dialogue not very interactive; in the second he shows a monologue and I think he should put some other pictures to interact with the spectator. In the third LO he used Go!Animate and we does a really great job because he put Professor Paulsen talking about is own theory (it’s a good way of not doing plagiarism).

PPEL, Unit 3, Task 2

Hello

To have a perspective from what it is the transparency in online learning process, I did a Prezi where you can see and comment my point of view. Here it is:

Online Transparency on Prezi

PPEL - Unit 3, Task 1

nnotated Bibliographie, Unit 3, Task 1

Bibliographie:

Christian Dalsgaard, Aarhus University, Denmark, Morten Flate Paulsen, Transparency in Cooperative Online Education, The Norwegian School of Information Technology, Norway

Michael F. Shaughnessy, Senior Columnist, EdNews.org, An Interview with Morten Flate Paulsen: Transparency in Online Education

Morten Flate Paulsen, Facing twelve hundred online students, Norwegian Information Technology College, mfp@nki.no, www.nki.no/pp/MFP

Morten F. Paulsen , http://www.slideshare.net/MortenFP/visualizing-student-profiles-through-nkis-online-catalogue-and-student-network

Teaching as transparent learning, http://www.connectivism.ca/

Morten F. Paulsen, Transparency for Cooperation, Toonlet

D. Randy Garrison, Terry Anderson, E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice

http://www.slideshare.net/MortenFP/visualizing-student-profiles-through-nkis-online-catalogue-and-student-network

http://www.slideshare.net/terrya/terry-anderson-alt-c-final

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9_QD0H0ypM&feature=PlayList&p=24D55AC163462D8B&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvF5KtN9CyI&feature=PlayList&p=24D55AC163462D8B&playnext_from=PL&index=2&playnext=2

Anotations:

Christian Dalsgaard, Aarhus University, Denmark, Morten Flate Paulsen, Transparency in Cooperative Online Education, The Norwegian School of Information Technology, Norway

‘Transparency is a dominant feature of social networking’. I think that it’s the fundamental idea: transparence is the first social step in the learning. So ‘Transparency means that you and your doings are visible to fellow students and teachers within a learning environment.’ The visibility is the second, but the internal step provides from social network. Sociability and visibility are the principle of the online learning, better the online cooperative learning. When we are transparent or visible we show what we are doing, for one way, and we show how much we could be sociable in a distant learning. But what is to be transparent? What kind of information put us visible? ‘This transparent information may include personal information about the users and statistics related to the users’ deployment of the online tools. It may further include work students and teachers provide in online notebooks, blogs, and discussion forums as well as results from quizzes, surveys, and assignments.’ But… be transparent for what? Well, be transparent have three positive effects in the learner and in the learning:

‘Preventive quality improvement: We are prone to provide better quality when we know that others have access to the information and contributions we provide.

Constructive quality improvement: We may learn from others when we have access to their data and contributions.

Reactive quality improvement: We may receive feedback from others when they have access to our data and contributions.’

Transparence in online environment is very good not only to students but also to teacher’s, because ‘Transparency may reduce the number of low quality contributions and may make high quality work more accessible as paragons for others. In transparent online learning environments, poor contributions from teachers and course designers cannot be hidden easily behind closed doors.’

This article show us the transparency barometer:

Michael F. Shaughnessy, Senior Columnist, EdNews.org, An Interview with Morten Flate Paulsen: Transparency in Online Education

This interview clears the positive effects of transparence (above) and show us two kinds of transparence: the teacher transparence and the learner transparence.

About teachers it says: ‘Transparency could reduce the amount of low quality contributions and make high quality work more accessible as paragons for others. In transparent online learning environments, poor teachers and course designers cannot easily hide their work behind closed doors.’ Teachers have not doors to close and not to show what are they doing. Poor contributions are found out.

In Cooperative learning: ‘Transparency is particularly relevant within cooperative learning, in which students are working on related projects or assignments, but not collaborating. Within cooperative online learning a central challenge is to enable students to follow the work of their colleagues. If students are unaware of the activities of fellow students, they might not make use of each other’.

It also show us tools that could show the transparence and the blog is one of them, because ‘This extreme transparency of work-in-progress allows the students to get feedback not only from their classmates, but from everybody on the internet as a part of their learning experience’; forum is also a toll where ‘actions within a social networking site are transparent. This creates a kind of indirect or passive form of communication and sharing.’, but this tool is not so ‘transparent’ because it only colleagues and teachers who see it (and not all the network, as in the blog).

Morten Flate Paulsen, Facing twelve hundred online students, Norwegian Information Technology College, mfp@nki.no, www.nki.no/pp/MFP

This article related cooperative freedom and transparency and, it also related with NKI and its learning model. It concept of transparency is ‘In other words, students and their actions are visible in the learning environment (Dalsgaard and Paulsen 2009:1). In this context, the personal presentations are excellent communication channels where the students can gather information and determine how transparent it should be.

Transparency means that general information, statistics and evaluations are shared and widely available. The exception is personal information that the student does not want to share (Paulsen 2007:62). Tuning of transparency level should take into consideration what kind of information it is useful and interesting to share with others and what information students would be proud to share others.’

Share information, tasks, and make visible its work is the way of being transparent in network learning.

Teaching as transparent learning, http://www.connectivism.ca/

The experience of being a transparent learner – on blogs, wikis, and Twitter – is a way to express ideas and have feedback. Having feedback we could be constructive in the learn and using transparence in learn we are ‘not proclaim what (we) know, but rather to engage and share with others as they explore and come to understand technology and related trends’. Share is the result of transparence. ‘Social technology – such as Twitter, blogs, Facebook – opens the door to sharing the process of learning, not only the final product.’

MortenFP, Transparency for Cooperation, Toonlet

This is a great learning object that show us the principal point of the transparence in cooperation and they are: personal identification; the learning process put in blog, notebooks, assignments. The fan number and friends show us the transparency and improve the quality of the learning show us the fails.

D. Randy Garrison, Terry Anderson, E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice

This is a book about e-learning. In the show pages it talks about something interesting: social presence. This is an interesting thing when we talk about online learning because when we are in this kind of learn we aren’t in a presence learn, however we are in a social environment and this environment (virtual) ask us transparence, because it put us in interactivity in the learn process, so it take us to create a community and this community is a social and a learn association with some people with the same interests, because ‘a sense of isolation or of not being connect will not encourage or support critical inquiry, nor it will engender intrinsic interest and motivation resulting from a share experience that provides acknowledgement and a sense of accomplishment’. This means that online learn without share or make accomplishment is not having a real learn.

http://www.slideshare.net/MortenFP/visualizing-student-profiles-through-nkis-online-catalogue-and-student-network

In this slide we see the student benefits, in special the sharing information, the make visible in a community online as also the institutional benefits. It also talks about the risks (the ethic risks of too much transparence), as well: ‘inappropriate content; copyright issues; criticism from dissatisfied students; students who expose too much information’. It inform us how NKI solves this potencial problem.

http://www.slideshare.net/terrya/terry-anderson-alt-c-final

This slidesahare gives us lot’s of information of learning experience online and in a slide it tell us what means online transparence, and the most important words are: ‘the ability to view and share thought’s, actions, resources, ideas and interest with others’. So e-learning experience could be very good if there was two things: cooperativism and transparence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9_QD0H0ypM&feature=PlayList&p=24D55AC163462D8B&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=1

This is an example that puts all is tonic in Web 2.0. This video show us that all of the power in transparency is interactive tools. Web 2.0 (interactive tools) is the big advantage in the transparence because blogs, web page…, means be transparent and show our learning to all (this tolls put us in the open network)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvF5KtN9CyI&feature=PlayList&p=24D55AC163462D8B&playnext_from=PL&index=2&playnext=2

This is a scream cast and show us what is transparence in online education. It show us the online transparence in MPEL(3) in Universidade Aberta (it’s big advantage is to give us an example in our country, in a public university to promote the visibility and the transparence – that give us freedom in cooperative learning -)

In conclusion I can say:

1) Online transparence relieves from a social presence - that begins in personal information until network tasks -;

2) Transparence is dominant from a social network – puts visible the work of what we are doing -;

3) Transparence is particularly relevant within cooperative learning - students follow the work of their colleagues, share and learn one of which others -;

4) There are several tools - web 2.0 - that improves transparence - forums, blogs, assignments, twitter... -;

5) Students benefits in being transparent are: sharing information, the feedback from their colleagues, teachers and the online community, and, make them visible in a online community;

6) Institutional benefits are: became transparent the learning process.

7) Teacher / the learning process benefits: ‘Transparency could reduce the amount of low quality contributions and make high quality work more accessible as paragons for others. In transparent online learning environments, poor teachers and course designers cannot easily hide their work behind closed doors.’(I couldn’t say it better);

8) The three positive effects in the learning process:

‘Preventive quality improvement: We are prone to provide better quality when we know that others have access to the information and contributions we provide.

Constructive quality improvement: We may learn from others when we have access to their data and contributions.

Reactive quality improvement: We may receive feedback from others when they have access to our data and contributions.’

9) There are some ethic riscks in transparecence, so we shoudn't have inappropriate content and whe should have copyright issues. It shouldn't have criticism from dissatisfied students and studentscould not expose too much information’

PPEL - United 2, task 2

Here is my Learning object:

United 2, Task 1 - Examples of Models and Stategies

4) Examples of Models and Stategies

Zorfass, Judith, Remz, Arlene, Gold Jennifer, Ethier, Denise, Corley, Patricia, Strategies for Successful Facilitation

This is an article talk’s with examples to reflect about some questions:

1) What strategies best guide and support online facilitators?

2) What are the characteristics of the online environment?

3) What successful online facilitators do?

1) “Some of our strategies relate to the process of designing an event; others relate to implementation; and still others help bring an event to closure. Some strategies require that we work behind the scenes; for others we are visible to participants, serving as ex-officio facilitators. In our most visible role, we take responsibility for responding to technical questions and providing user support. (…) NCIP has developed the following four strategies to support facilitators: 1) co-constructing workshops with the facilitator; 2) modeling and mentoring; 3) coaching to prevent and ameliorate problems; 4) working in tandem with the facilitator to promote interactivity.”

2)” Participants, as well as facilitators, have few models to rely on for how they are to think, collaborate, share, and build knowledge in an online environment that depends on writing.”

3) “Orienting participants and guiding them to post and read messages, as well as to locate, review, and download relevant messages, materials, and resources; making sure that participants understand the expectations and norms for respectful interaction, as well as knowing how to follow directions for carrying out the associated tasks and activities (both online and offline); creating a strong, interactive learning environment by encouraging participants to provide information and resources, discuss issues, and collaborate with each other to generate solutions to problems; using a variety of strategies to help participants expand their knowledge based on their particular situations, needs, interests, and abilities, such as:1) asking people to elaborate upon, justify, or support ideas, especially if there are conflicting views or multiple perspectives; 2) infusing content information to nourish the conversation; 3) pointing out ways in which one person’s comment links to or builds upon another’s; encouraging the connection of ideas, thus moving the communication from individual ideas to a group understanding. Encouraging participants to reflect on what they have learned and what impact this information has on their beliefs and behavior; guiding participants, as relevant, to critique the online learning experience from a personal and professional perspective.”

Relevance: It show us examples about online tutors and them strategies to be successful in their courses.

http://www.concord.org/courses/facilitating/

It’s a site about on line courses and pedagogical concord technique. The following nine key characteristics define The Concord Consortium's approach to delivering quality e-Learning.

1. Asynchronous collaboration. Participants don't have to be logged on to the course simultaneously; they work in an asynchronous environment in which text-based, threaded discussion and collaborative problem solving form the core learning strategy.

2. Explicit schedules. Instructors of online courses that rely on collaborative discussions schedule lessons within a specific timeframe so participants can share similar experiences and insights.

3. Expert facilitation. Online courses are led by a qualified person specifically trained in online facilitation.

4. Inquiry pedagogy. Designers create effective online courses -- with many specific elements that contribute to sound pedagogy for inquiry learning.

5. Community building. Course designers and instructors are proactive in designing and nurturing a community culture in which participants are supportive, honest, and willing to take intellectual risks.

6. Limited enrollment. There are between 12 and 25 participants in a class to keep collaborative learning manageable.

7. High-quality materials. Course designers include the widest feasible range of media and activities to appeal to different styles of learning.

8. Purposeful virtual spaces. Online, course designers create explicit structures so the community gets what it needs without interrupting the flow of content-based discussions. Typically included are a "Student Lounge," a "Questions about Assignments," a "Technical Questions," and a "Class Meeting" discussion space for debriefing course experiences.

9. Ongoing assessment. Online assessment is a continuous, ongoing process. Instructors find evidence of achievement in participants' daily contributions to online discussions. They learn each student's unique voice and approach to solving problems through their postings.

Relevance: It gives us another example about a pedagogical model and the caracteristisc that are fulcral to on line courses (to this model).

United 2, Task 1 - Interaction Strategies

3) Interaction Strategies

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par03/06par03.htm

It’s about large scale interaction strategies and it talks about: multi-group interaction (there are groups whit students and a facilitator), forum interaction (it’s similar to the muiti group but with an other interaction between the different groups), sub - group interaction(with a particular discussion area), large group interaction (it’s an experimental type of interaction), meta – interaction (similar to a radio talk show).

Relevance: It show us five interaction strategies and what is made in each one of them (by the group and the facilitator).

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par04/01par04.htm

It’s about types of synchronous interaction and presents teleconferencing, video conferencing, chat rooms, instant messaging and online collaborative tools. Down we see the presentation of this last type of synchronous interaction:

Relevance: It show us five types of synchronous interaction, giving us the the benefits and the issues of witch one.

United 2, task 1 - Pedagogical Techniques

2) Pedagogical Techniques

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par03/02par03.htm

This link talk’s about three specific pedagogical techniques ideal for on-line facilitation: e-mail paradigm (one to one – individual bases learning -. It’s great to establish goals and be more connect with Professor, like in learning contracts), bulletin board paradigm (one to many – lectures, symposiums) and conferencing paradigm(many to many – debates, simulations, case studies, brainstorming and projects). It’s a very interesting audio explication (podcast).

Relevance: It explains three specific pedagogical techniques ideal for on-line facilitation.

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par03/03par03.htm

It makes an examination of the various aspects of facilitation from a pedagogical (have clear objectives, remain flexible, encourage participation, don’t be authoritarian, be objective, expect less, don’t rely on off-line materials, design for private conversations, find unifying threads, use simply assignments, make material relevant, require contributions, present conflicting opinions, invite visiting experts, don’t lecture and request responses) social (lurkers will be there, fear is commune, don’t use humor or sarcasm, have people post introductions, promote opportunities for interactivity, encourage good discussion behavior, discourage bad discussion behavior, deal with flames quickly and decisively) managerial (maintain informality, provide a list of participants, be responsive, be patient, use participant names, engage in meta – communication, synchronize and resynchronize, provide procedural leadership, prompt frequently and be clear, don’t overload people, move misplaced content, handle tangents appropriately, call on individuals, develop participant leaders an end the sessions), and technical (give feedback to problems, provide study guides, provide time to learn, allow for peer learning, lecture only when appropriate, give clear directions) perspective.

Relevance: It’s about the aspects of facilitation in four perspectives (pedagogical, social, managerial and technical) to the online tutor.

United 2, Task 1 - Models of Interaction

1) Models of Interaction

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par01/02par01.htm

It compares Face-to-Face and Online Interaction as we see in this table:

Relevance: make the difference between face to face and online interaction.

http://www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide/par03/01par03.htm

This link talk’s about two models for facilitating asynchronous discussion in an on-line learning environment: first it talk’s about Amount of Interactivity Model (access and motivation, online socialization, information exchange, knowledge construction and development – all of them are done in two steps: e-moderating and technical support), then it talk’s about Concord Consortium Model (it talk’s about Social dialogue, argumentative dialogue and pragmatic dialogue. This model also talk’s about the roles of the facilitator and the healthy on-line communities). This is explains to us in ‘voice’ and show us some images, like we were really in a class.

Relevance: It explains too models of asynchronous discussion and it’s paper in e-learning environment.

United 2, Task 1 - Índice

Annoted Bibliographie

 

Giguere, Paul, Hybrid Teaching GuideVersion 2,(www.ncmeresource.org/onsite/dh_guide), Sinclair Community College, December 2006, Copyright.

Zorfass, Judith, Remz, Arlene, Gold Jennifer, Ethier, Denise, Corley, Patricia, Strategies for Successful Facilitation, Education Development Center, Inc., Copyright, 1998

Concord Consortium, Copyright, 2010

My Annoted Bibliographie is structured in four Topics:

1) Models of Interaction

2) Pedagogical Techniques

3) Interaction Strategies

4) Examples of Models and Strategies

Unit 1, Act 4

One of the points that I didn´t understand in cooperative learning or in e-learning regime is related to transparenece in evalution. So I put the question to Dr.ª Lina to understand the process in Universidade Aberta:



"Dear Prof. Lina,

My name is Cecília Tomás and I am a master student in ‘Pedagogia Elearning’. I would like to ask you a question related to your coordination and teacher function in Universidade Aberta:

How do you feel about transparence in distance learning? Isn’t it possible that someone less responsible but ‘smart’ do a distance course without been his /her to do it (in reality)? How can you distinguish who does and who doesn’t do, in fact, their work’s? "

She said to me that she didn’t understand the second part of the question and if it is related whit evaluation. Then I said that:


"Indeed the question that I posed to you can attach the issue of evaluation. As a teacher I find myself sometimes with complex situations when I reach the part of the assessment and realize that some works were not made by a particular student (because I know the student and I know what he is capable of doing or not); this happens, I think, because of the interpersonal relationship (in person) that is established. In the case of distance education there is (it seems) one problem: the teacher does not know me, do not know, since the beginning, of what I'm capable to do and, therefore, who assures him that my work is not done by someone else ? I remember a television program with Mr. Rector of UA has been placed on this issue, to which he responded with the need for the personal presence at certain times of evaluation. Now this course and all course online was no moments of classroom assessment. In this way someone could be able to act in 'bad faith' and have a diploma that does not match what he / she did. My question is this: how can you talk about transparency (individual assessment) in a fully online course?"

Now I'm waiting for her ansewer.
----------------------"------------------------------------"------------------------------"------------------

Today Professor Lina answered to my question and she say to me:

"Dear Cecília,


I believe transparency is very valuable in any educational context, because it helps students and teachers achieve a better learning experience. In an online context, this is made easier and more powerful due to the technologies that allow for easy publication, access and interaction, with the additional affordance of having a much wider audience when you publish and communicate outside the virtual classroom, as often happens in our Master’s.

The fact that a student’s work is made available for the others to see and comment upon deepens the social dimension that learning should have and provides more opportunities for learning with and from the other students and other people. It also helps contextualize and understand the teacher’s actions and decisions, providing, at the same time, a broader feedback, since the comments made to somebody’s work might be really helpful to many others.

As for the second part of your question, I would say it is possible, but highly improbable given certain conditions I will try to explain briefly. This is a recurrent question concerning online learning, and a very important one. As happens with other educational contexts, online education is not immune to fraud. People cheat in face-to-face tests, exams and individual or group assignments, and the same happens in assessment situations online. We need to accept the fact that there will always be a minority of people who will beat the system, because no system is 100% fraud-proof. Our effort needs to concentrate on keeping the numbers very small and guarantee that these are rare exceptions.

We need to look at this issue relating it to the pedagogical approach (the type of activities and tasks students are asked to perform) and to the kind of assessment strategy is put in place (how students have to demonstrate their knowledge or competence). Moreover, we need to check how the assessment activities are related to the learning tasks.

IF the online learning experience

• is based on memorizing and reproducing content

• encompasses little interaction or the teacher has little or no presence in that interaction

• requires no collaboration among students

• is not transparent at all, i.e. students do not have to publish their work

• does not require students to regularly perform tasks and produce some sort of artifact that demonstrates or illustrates what they have learned or have become capable of doing

THEN you will need some sort of face-to-face assessment to guarantee the identity of the student assessed and the validity of their knowledge, because it is almost impossible to identify most cases of fraud.

IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, the online learning experience

• is based on developing skills and competences

• has a high level of interaction and the teacher participates regularly in that interaction

• requires students to collaborate or cooperate throughout the learning process

• is transparent, i.e. requires students to publish their work

• requires students to perform tasks regularly and produce artifacts that demonstrate or illustrate their knowledge of the contents studied and their skills and competences in applying them in specific situations

AND the assessment activities

• require a personal elaboration of the contents

• are related to the tasks performed, drawing on material and reflections produced in the process

• are multiple and diversified

• are specific, i.e. require the application of knowledge and skills to specific situations

THEN the chances for fraud are pretty low.

It is not impossible that you find someone who, for any strange reason, would be willing to work endless hours to do a course like this for you, but, as I said in the beginning, this is very improbable. Furthermore, the high levels of interaction and the strong social dimension characteristic of this pedagogical approach enable the development of effective interpersonal relationships that allow people to know each other relatively well.

Many more things could certainly be said about such a complex question, but I hope to have helped you understand a little better the most important aspects involved."

Unit 1; Activity 3 - PPEL

Annoted Bibliography: from what I saw in my colleagues AB I’ve learn some things and I think I have to review and rewrite my AB.

António Pedro AB: His AB is very interesting in a particular way: he stands a group of questions to make understand collaborative and cooperative learning; he also stands a question related whit pedagogical techniques. It’s an AB synthetic but well done. I learn whit him that we should propose questions and try to answered to them to understand what’s mean to understand.

Maria João Spilker: in this AB there’s a very good structure what means about transparence in cooperative freedom. This is not very understandable in my AB; I need to talk about this item. I need to talk about the hexagon of cooperative freedom.

Hugo Domingos: It was a good structure which harmonize lecture with write and images. It isn’t a tiring lecture.

Paula Silva: She introduces a very important item – the article relevance to the theme analyses -; in my future AB I will introduce this item.

In all the AB that I read I saw a preoccupation whit the difference between Individual, Collaborative and Cooperative learning. The most of all talk’s about six freedoms and the transparence term in cooperative freedom (that is not well done or perceptible in my AB). I also learn that I should be more synthetic and try to write about the article relevance to the theme that I’m analyse.

Learning Object: In most of LO we saw the learner perspective; in a few we saw the tutor perspective.

I’ve discover Prezi that is a great instrument to present in an interactive way. I’ve done this discover whit Maria João LO. However Prezi is not easy to work because there is a redoubled work whit the space in a giant screen and he have to be very careful whit the spacing between content because if not the lecture could be confuse or disperse. That’s what happen in Paula Silva LO. In Juliana LO we saw the professor challenge but isn’t very specific (in my point of view) his tasks (it isn’t need, but if it has it will give us a more global perspective). In BD I saw that we shouldn’t put big speacks or, if we do it, we shouldn’t put a character because it will be cut. In Joaquim LO I think that is a grateful job, but I can’t understand the difference between collaborative and cooperative learning. Whit Maria Leal I’ve discovery the Xtranormal to do some amusing films.

Whit my colleagues I’ve learn that there is lots of tools to do Open Educational Resources. In other task I’ll try to do other LO with other new tool (for me).

One question that I put to myself when I start to do my LO - initially I start to do a power-point – is: what images I could put in here… lot of them aren’t license in OER; so I chose to do something different and that I don’t need to use images. Now I know where I find them, but… there some great images that aren’t free.

United 1; Activity 2

Como fazer uma bibliografia comentada - algumas dicas

O QUE É UMA BIBLIOGRAFIA ANOTADA?

Uma bibliografia anotada é uma lista de citações de livros, artigos e documentos. Cada citação é seguida de uma breve (geralmente cerca de 150 palavras), descritiva e avaliativa anotação. A finalidade da anotação é informar o leitor sobre a pertinência, precisão e qualidade das fontes citadas.

________________________________________

ANOTAÇÕES VS. ABSTRACÇÕES

A síntese dos resumos é puramente descritiva, encontrado-se frequentemente no início de artigos de revistas académicas ou em índices de periódicos. As anotações são descritivos e críticas e expõem o ponto de vista do autor com clareza e adequação da expressão e autoridade.

________________________________________

O PROCESSO

Criar uma bibliografia anotada necessita da aplicação de uma variedade de habilidades intelectuais: exposição concisa, análise sucinta e pesquisa bibliográfica informada.

Em primeiro lugar há que localizar e registar as citações de livros, periódicos e documentos que podem conter informações úteis e ideias sobre o tema em análise. Resumidamente deve-se examinar e analisar os elementos reais. Em seguida, escolher as obras que oferecem uma variedade de perspectivas sobre o tema.

Citar o livro, artigo, ou documento com o estilo apropriado.

Escreva uma anotação sucinta que resume o tema central do livro ou artigo. Incluir uma ou mais frases que: a) avalie a autoridade do autor, (b) a intenção com que se dirige ao público, (c) comparar ou contrastar este trabalho com outros citados, ou (d) explicar como este trabalho é importante para a sua bibliografia.

________________________________________

 

Exemplo:

Anotação bibliográfica de um artigo de Jornal:

1) The following example uses the APA format for the journal citation.

Waite, L. J., Goldschneider, F. K., & Witsberger, C. (1986). Nonfamily living and the erosion

of traditional family orientations among young adults. American Sociological Review, 51 (4), 541-554.

The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and Brown University, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Young Women and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living by young adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations, moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They find their hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effects were fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away from parents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, and changes in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study by Williams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex role attitudes as a result of nonfamily living.

2) This example uses the MLA format for the journal citation. NOTE: Standard MLA practice requires double spacing within citations.

Waite, Linda J., Frances Kobrin Goldscheider, and Christina Witsberger. "Nonfamily Living and the

Erosion of Traditional Family Orientations Among Young Adults." American Sociological Review 51.4 (1986): 541-554. Print.

The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and Brown University, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Young Women and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living by young adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations, moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They find their hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effects were fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away from parents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, and changes in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study by Williams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex role attitudes as a result of nonfamily living.

Fonte: http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/skill28.htm
URL: http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/permission.html