Looking for a Graduate Supervisor?

Are you thinking about starting a graduate program in education? I created the following notes for prospective students interested in working with me for either a master’s or doctoral degree. First, I will begin by briefly explaining the different degree options for four programs that I am currently involved in:

  • MEd Interdisciplinary Degree, Learning Sciences Special Topic – Leading and Learning in a Digital Age – This a course-based program (non-thesis route) and you do not need a supervisor. Read more about the program that I coordinate (blog post). You can apply the 4 courses from the Learning and Leading in a Digital Age towards the MEd Interdisciplinary degree. Application deadline is usually every year, March 1st
  • MA Degree, Learning Sciences specialization – Consider this Master of Arts program in education if you are looking for a thesis route for your master’s degree. This program requires a supervisor and the supervisor will be assigned to you when admitted into the program. Application is yearly, Dec. 1st
  • EdD Degree, Learning Sciences specialization – Are you a working professional? Complete this doctorate with a combination of summer residency courses and online courses throughout the year. This program requires a supervisor and the supervisor will be assigned to you when admitted into the program. Application is usually every two years, Dec. 1st
  • Phd Degree in Educational Research, Learning Sciences specialization – This is a residency program with most courses offered on-campus. This program requires a supervisor and the supervisor will be assigned to you when admitted into the program. Application is yearly, Dec. 1st

All of the programs are highly competitive and if you would like to work with me as your supervisor, then you might consider the following:

  1. Review the profiles for scholars in the Learning Sciences specialization to find a good fit for your research interests. I recommend reviewing publication lists (e.g., see my Google Scholar profile, institutional profile). You can also connect with me in Twitter (@barbbrown)
  2. Prepare your CV and Admission Portfolio and be sure to include previous degree information, thesis (if applicable), reports, peer-reviewed and professional articles, curriculum documents, conference presentations, awards, research grants or scholarships. Publications should be listed in APA 7 format and include the name of the journal and doi number if available. You can also include links to digital sources, and evidence of prior learning.
  3. Prepare your Statement of Intent and connect your study proposal and research interests to literature in Learning Sciences and to your rationale for requesting specific supervisors.
  4. Select two referees who can comment on your research abilities. Students usually select previous supervisors from undergraduate or graduate research projects or other course instructors and faculty who are familiar with their work and research-based skills.
  5. Submit your requests early on for ALL official transcripts from post-secondary institutions you have attended.
  6. Note: Supervisors are normally appointed at the time of admission so there is no guarantee that you will be admitted into a program or that you will have the supervisor you requested.
  7. This is not intended to be a complete list of requirements and only a starter list so you can start to prepare early. Check the faculty of graduate studies website for more details about the application requirements.

I hope this information is helpful for you as you consider applying for a graduate program in education!

MEd Summer 2022 Programs

Are you interested in starting a Master’s degree (MEd Interdisciplinary) in Education in Summer 2022? We are hosting an information session on January 25, 2022 at 6pm MT.  Register for the session – here

Here’s a couple of programs that might interest you:

Leading and Learning in a Digital Age (Fully Online)

Be a Leader in the Digital Age!

Join us in the award winning, fully online Master of Education program, Leading and Learning in a Digital Age acknowledged with a UNESCO Open Education Resource (OER) Implementation Award in 2021! Digital innovation and learning in multimodal contexts have become a global focus. Explore the complexities of inclusive and high-quality digital learning environments using online pedagogies. This four-course topic in Learning Sciences is fully online and designed with flexibility for working professionals. Learn alongside instructors and invited guests who are internationally recognized in the educational technology field and experience a highly interactive online learning experience with zero textbook costs (ZTC).

Take risks and learn how to use innovative technologies, develop your social learning network, and critically examine the literature and research in the field. Plan to make a difference in your work context to help others navigate the complexities of living and working a digital world. This program attracts teachers and professionals in educational environments as well as professionals in other fields and disciplinary areas, world-wide.

For more information about this program, contact Dr. Barbara Brown – babrown@ucalgary.ca 

Collaborative Creativity for Social Innovation & Human-Centred Design (Fully Online)

Be a Changemaker!

Become a cohort member of this transformative four-course, fully online graduate program in education for those wishing to develop collaborative cultures of creativity in their professional workplaces, classrooms, and across connected networks. Learn to engage in interactivity and empathetic and generative communication in a way to achieve high levels of collaboration that leverages the strengths of each group and community member to achieve what would be difficult or near impossible as individuals. The first two courses are both online, week-long courses, in July 2022 allowing cohort members to complete half of this program in a short time window. Courses 3 and 4 are totally online in the fall and winter semesters.  All courses are highly interactive!

A central feature of this program is continual collaborative engagement in contextual personal and professional creative problem solving across a wide range of real-world contexts from the United Nations Sustainable Global Goals to the classroom or professional workplace. This is supported by action and literature-based research in creativity, collaboration, and human-centred design. The Collaborative Creativity for Social Innovation and Human-Centred Design  graduate program will help you develop and empower your creative and collaborative potentials and those around you.

For more information about this program, contact Dr. Robert Kelly – rkelly@ucalgary.ca

Learn more about the MEd Interdisciplinary Program and other topics offered for Summer 2022!

UNESCO OER Implementation Award for Excellence 2021

Open Education Award Badge

Congratulations to our team for presenting a session at the Open Education Global Conference 2021. The online conference was from September 27 – October 1, 2021.

Awards for excellence recognize contributions and in 2021 our team including myself (PI), Verena Roberts, Michele Jacobsen, Christie Hurrell, Nicole Neutzling and Mia Travers-Hayward, along with conference presenters received the UNESCO OER Implementation Award for Excellence for collective impact of the community.

Our slides from the presentation can be accessed here.

 

Coded Bias: Education Panelist Perspective

The film Coded Bias makes an excellent contribution to a dialogue that is far too limited in education. My comments and perspectives are based on my career as a K-12 teacher and now working in teacher education in post-secondary with an interest in transforming teaching and learning. I would like to thank Shalini Kantayya and everyone involved in the film making for provoking this much needed dialogue to help guide the way forward as machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) continue to evolve and impact all aspects of society. The film reminds us that societal biases can be encoded in algorithms unknowingly or unintentionally and can lead to algorithmic bias, a problem that may not be easily detected. The use of algorithms can lead to important decisions that affect people’s lives. As shown in the film, it’s possible for an algorithm to provide an invalid assessment of an exemplary teacher that can impact employment, retention or tenure. Similarly, invalid assessments of students can impact admissions, program advancement, assessments and decisions related to their academic conduct. What are the imperatives for education? For educators, for schools, for curricula? I would like to discuss three imperatives (I’m sure there are many more):

First, biases need to be critically examined. I often refer to the double-edged sword of innovation. With AI for example, there can be extraordinary opportunities for improvement, such as increased efficiency but there can also be significant consequences, such as the invasive surveillance shown in the film. Technology can be helpful and at the same time technology can also cause undue harm. AI can be developed for seemingly good purposes and with intent to be harmless not harmful. However, there can be insufficient attention to the biases in designs. In teaching we refer to teachers as designers of learning and recognize that each teacher has bias, each curriculum designer has bias, each curriculum has bias. The film demonstrates why it is important for designers in any field to analyze bias in their designs. Bias in designs need to be critically analyzed and questioned from multiple perspectives; bias needs to be discovered and uncovered at the very early stages in the design process. Too often designers move from prototype to testing or from draft curricula in education to pilot phases without critically examining and limiting the biases.

A second imperative is to raise the expectations and standards for ethics in designs.

In education we need transparency and accountability for algorithms that are used that have potential to impact overall advancement of individuals. There needs to be full disclosure of the algorithms and there needs to be regulations for their use. We need to question the ethics and raise the standards when using AI as the first step and first stop in making important decisions that have human impact. False positives can have a significant negative human impact.

A third imperative is to take responsibility and assume a role in protecting integrity. We all have a role and responsibility to protect the integrity of a meaningful world. In my role as an educator and scholar in education, and an academic coordinator for a graduate program called Leading and Learning in a Digital Age, I aim to design courses and conduct research and continually interrogate and critically examine implications of innovations in education. We need to advocate for, look for and consider plausible consequences when designing learning or when faced with testing or piloting any new inventions and innovation. As a society, how might we take action? How might we advance high standards of the technologies we use with learners, the technologies we develop for learning, the learning designs and the curricula used?

There were three key imperatives that resonated with me from an educational perspective as I viewed the film: there is a need to critically examine the biases; there is a need to raise the expectations and standards for ethics in designs; and there is need for all of us to take responsibility and assume a role in protecting the integrity of a meaningful world.

You may find the following related links interesting ( shared by Dr. Lisa Silver,  Faculty of Law, University of Calgary):

Federal Digital Charter: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/062.nsf/eng/h_00108.html

Law Commission of Ontario, The Rise and Fall of AI and Algorithms In American Criminal Justice: Lessons for Canada, (Toronto: October 2020)

Lisa Silver and Gideon Christian, “Harnessing the Power of AI Technology; A Commentary on the Law Commission of Ontario Report on AI and the Criminal Justice System” (November 18, 2020), online: ABlawg, http://ablawg.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Blog_LS_GC_LCO_Report.pdf (commenting on the LCO Report)

Recent privacy review of Clearview AI: Joint investigation of Clearview AI, Inc. by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia, and the Information Privacy Commissioner of Alberta:

https://canlii.ca/t/jd55x

Ewert v. Canada, 2018 SCC 30 (CanLII), [2018] 2 SCR 165: https://canlii.ca/t/hshjz (bias in risk assessment tools)

Multiple Reports on the issue from AI NOW Institute: https://ainowinstitute.org/reports.html.

LAWNOW Magazine – Special report on Privacy: https://canlii.ca/t/sjpm

An accessible perspective: McSweeney’s Issue 54: The End of Trust (2018)

Analysis of digital literacies in the Draft Alberta K-6 Curriculum

 

By Barbara Brown & Michele Jacobsen

Over the past couple of weeks, Alberta educators, curriculum experts and researchers have offered a variety of responses to the March 2021 Draft Alberta K-6 Curriculum [start here, here, here, and here]. One journalist gave the draft top marks, but most experts, after detailed and critical review, assign a failing grade. Dr. Carla Peck, Professor of Social Studies Education, Faculty of Education, University of Alberta, completed a detailed analysis of the draft K-6 Social Studies Curriculum and calls for a complete re-write. In a future post, we will address the clear disconnect between professional practice expectations of teachers (TQS), school leaders (LQS), and superintendents (SLQS) and the draft K-6 curriculum. The professional practice standards include competencies for applying foundational knowledge of First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples and culture in educational professionals’ work with children, and these ideas and concepts are only superficially addressed in the draft curriculum.

 

An explosion of social media activity includes diverse commentary and sharp critiques that run counter the positive and defensive narrative from the ministry. We appreciate the detailed analysis of plagiarism in the curriculum documents provided by our colleague, Dr. Sarah Elaine Eaton, from the University of Calgary. The two of us (Drs. Brown and Jacobsen) have decided to weigh in on the relative lack of any meaningful role for learning technology and digital media in the draft K-6 Curriculum documents. Our initial analysis contributes a review of digital literacies and competencies, technology, coding and ethics from an educational technology perspective. The two of us hold teaching expertise and our doctorates in educational technology, conduct research in online and blended K-12 and post-secondary contexts, and have been involved in development of the Information and Communication Technology Curriculum (2000) and the Technology Policy Framework (2013) . We have both served as members of the School Technology Advisory Committee in Alberta. Alberta Education has been a world leader in the integration of technology for learning across the curriculum. The timeline of learning and technology in Alberta from 1975 to 2009 also includes various initiatives and research projects that we have both been part of and provides a foundation for our research in Alberta schools.

 

We are also involved in designing and continually updating contemporary university programs for educators, such as the Leading and Learning in a Digital Age graduate certificate that invites critical inquiry on leading learning and teaching with technology across the curriculum.

 

The following themes emerged in our analysis of close to 273 pages of draft curriculum documents including the competency progressions, literacy progressions, numeracy progressions, subject introductions and draft curriculum for ELA, Fine Arts, Mathematics, Physical Education and Wellness, Science, Social Studies, and Visual Arts. Our review does not include the French Immersion or French Language curriculum, Dance, Music or Drama. We suggest further analysis of learning technologies and digital literacy should include all of the draft curriculum documents.

 

Our initial analysis includes five key areas of concern related to digital literacies in the draft K-6 curriculum. First, we note that digital literacies and digital competencies are not part of the literacy progressions. We note that digital texts are referenced 5 times, as are vague notions of modes and media. We argue that specific reference to digital literacies and digital competencies must be included in the literacy progressions in a modern curriculum, especially if Alberta children are to learn how to navigate, evaluate and create knowledge in this post-truth era in which disinformation, appeals to emotion and fake news proliferates.

 

Second, the outcomes that include the terms technology, technologies or digital are limited in frequency throughout the curriculum, include few expectations for the early grades and are unclear with a possibility for different interpretations:

  • Words with technology appeared in 20 instances in the English Language Arts, Math and Science documents, and the term “technologies” also appeared in 20 instances but only in the Science documents.
  • In the English Language Arts K-6 draft, the first of three instances of technology appeared in grade 4. Based on our research, we are concerned about this omission in K-3 in the English Language Arts curriculum and discuss findings from one of our studies with early learners using technology here. The way the term technology and technologies are used in the draft curriculum are ambiguous. For example, in the Language arts curriculum in grade 6 – “Vocabulary is contextual and influenced by emerging or changing conditions, including technology” is vague and can be interpreted as optional.
  • In Math, the single instance of technology appeared in grade 5: “Create various representations of data, including with technology, to interpret frequency.”
  • In the Science curriculum, the term technology appeared in the introduction and started to appear minimally in grade 2. The term technologies appeared starting in grade 3. However, the terms technology and technologies appeared most frequently in the grade 5-6 outcomes. Even in the science curriculum, we noted the ambiguous use. For example, in Science Grade 6, the term technology is used as part of a list (e.g., computers, coding and technology).
  • Even though the term digital appears in over 130 instances throughout the documents, the term is mostly preceded by the term OR and can be interpreted as optional. For example, “use non-digital OR digital sources/texts” is commonly used in the English Language Arts curriculum. In contrast, a conceptual framework for emergent digital literacy from Australia used more precise language, “As we progress in the 21st century, children learn to become proficient readers and writers of both digital and non-digital texts” (Neumann, Finger & Neumann, 2017, p. 471). The Australian authors clearly emphasize the use of both digital and non-digital unlike the ambiguous wording currently used in the draft Alberta curriculum.

 

Third, we are concerned that the use of coding in the curriculum suggests that computer programming skills are sufficiently integrated in the draft K-6 curriculum. While computer science is listed in the practical skills section, coding is simplified in the learning outcomes as a mechanical process that can be done with paper/pencil. When we searched the 273 pages, the word coding only appeared in 17 learning outcomes and all of these instances were found in the Science curriculum grade 5, 6. The integration of coding is limited to learning in one disciplinary area and is absent for younger learners. Where are the “algorithms, technology and engineering to design solutions to problems” evident in the learning outcomes? These omissions in the draft curriculum stand in direct contrast to contemporary research on the importance of coding and computational thinking for all learners worldwide.  Andreas Schleicher, OECD Director (March 22, 2019), asked “Should schools teach coding?”, and presents important questions about coding and computational thinking that need to be better considered in the Alberta K-6 draft curriculum: “How can we focus learning on the “essence” of a subject rather than the ‘mechanics of the moment’? It is fair to question how working code on paper in a modern age offers any value beyond rote mechanics.

 

Fourth, we argue the curriculum should include explicit focus on ethics and technology at every age. The word ethics only appears in 3 instances and all of these were in the Science curriculum, grade 5. Here’s one of our recent books regarding the importance of ethical use of technology in digital learning environments to support our argument for increasing the curricular focus in this area. As they engage deeply in accessing and contributing knowledge a digital world, Alberta students and teachers need to be engaged in conversations and inquiry into contemporary issues such as personal privacy, access rights, copyright, surveillance, and security.

 

Fifth, there is limited and superficial reference to technology and digital competencies in this draft curriculum. We would have expected a new curriculum to build on or further develop the concepts and ideas in the Learning and Technology Policy Framework (LTPF) from 2013. The LTPF, Policy Direction 1 described the direction for technology use with students: “to support student-centred, personalized, authentic learning for all students” (p. 5) and this could have been a great starting point for developing a contemporary curriculum for Alberta’s children. Instead, this draft curriculum takes us back decades in failing to adequately consider learning technologies, digital literacy and digital competencies for Alberta children.

 

We recognize this is an initial versus comprehensive critique of the relative absence of meaningful consideration of educational technology in the draft. We anticipate and welcome more commentaries and critique to emerge over the coming days and weeks. Based on our initial analysis, we argue the ministry needs to go back to the drawing board to design a contemporary curriculum that prepares learners for their digital futures and digital economies, instead of our pasts. We also encourage everyone to get involved in the public engagement and provide feedback on the draft K-6 curriculum presented in March 2021.

 

Schleicher (2019), OECD, leaves us with this call to action: “To determine what tomorrow’s students should learn, we must assemble the best minds in a given country – leading experts in the field, but also those who understand how students learn, as well as those who have a good understanding of how knowledge and skills are used in the real world. Such knowledge sharing will allow us to more precisely determine and regularly re-examine which topics should be taught and in what sequence – without succumbing to the temptations of the moment” (P 9).

 

Some of the best minds and leading experts in their fields across Alberta, and school, classroom and university experts who understand how children learn, are analyzing, questioning and critiquing elements of this draft curriculum; will the Minister of Education listen? Or, will she continue to succumb to the ideological and political temptations of the moment?

Note: This post is also available on Dr. Michele Jacobsen’s blog

Feel free to connect with us: babrown@ucalgary.ca and dmjacobs@ucalgary.ca  OR Twitter handles: @barbbrown @dmichelej

 

Advancing Faculty Development and Graduate Supervision Online: A Global Dialogue Forum

Overview of our global dialogue presented on March 30, 2021:  In this session we discuss the challenges and opportunities for advancing faculty development and graduate supervision in online learning. We dispel myths about online learning environments and discuss how digital innovations provide possibilities for faculty and students to learn and connect globally. We also share our experiences with engaging pre-service, in-service teachers, and faculty in professional learning through an online pedagogy series and graduate supervision MOOC.

Link to Presentation  – Mar30-2021 Slides.pptx

University of Calgary Links:

Werklund School of Education Graduate Programs, University of Calgary – https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/graduate-programs

Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning, University of Calgary – https://taylorinstitute.ucalgary.ca/ (open access learning modules)

Other Related Sources:

Brown, B. (2019). One-Take Productions for Student Feedback. Education Canada Magazine, 59(2). https://www.edcan.ca/articles/student-feedback/

 

Brown, B. (2020). Using Zoom to create weekly video message for students.

http://www.drbarbbrown.com/2020/06/18/using-zoom-to-create-a-weekly-video-message-for-students/

 

Brown, B., Alonso-Yanez, G., Friesen, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2020). High school redesign: Carnegie unit as a catalyst for change. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy (CJEAP), 193, 97-114. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjeap/article/view/68066

 

Brown, B., Burns, A., Kendrick, A., Kapoyannis, T., & Delanoy, N. (2020). Adapting to changing K-12 contexts during COVID-19: Teacher education perspectives. In M. K. Barbour & LaBonte, R., Stories from the field: Voices of K-12 Stakeholders during Pandemic, Canadian eLearning Network, pp. 63-68. https://sites.google.com/view/canelearn-ert/

 

Brown, B. & Eaton, S. E. (2020). Using a community of inquiry lens to examine synchronous online discussions in graduate courses. In L. Wilton, & Brett C. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Online Discussion-Based Teaching Methods (pp. 229-262), IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3292-8

 

Brown, B., Jacobsen, M., & Lambert, D. (2014, May 9-10). Learning technologies in higher education [Paper presentation]. In P. Preciado Babb (Ed.). Proceedings of the IDEAS: Rising to the Challenge Conference, (pp. 25-43). Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, AB, Canada. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/50588

 

Brown, B., Roberts, V., Jacobsen, M., & Hurrell, C. (Eds.) (2020). Ethical use of technology in digital learning environments: Graduate student perspectives. University of Calgary [eBook]  https://doi.org/10.11575/ant1-kb38

 

Brown, B. & Vaughan, N. (2018). Designing group work in blended learning environments. In R. J. Harnish, K. R. Bridges, D. N. Sattler, M. L. Signorella, & M. Munson (Eds.). The Use of Technology in Teaching and Learning (pp. 82-97). Society for the Teaching of Psychology web site: https://teachpsych.org/ebooks/useoftech

 

Donovan, T., Bates, T., Seaman, J., Mayer, D., Martel, E., Paul, R., . . . Poulin, R. (2019). Tracking online and distance education in Canadian universities and colleges: 2018. Canadian National Survey of Online and Distance Education, Public Report. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://onlinelearningsurveycanada.ca/

 

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework – https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/

 

Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003

 

Irvine, V. (2020, Oct 26). The Landscape of Merging Modalities. Educause Review, 4. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/10/the-landscape-of-merging-modalities

 

Jacobsen, M., Friesen, S., & Lock, J. (2013). Strategies for Engagement: Knowledge building and intellectual engagement in participatory learning environments. Education Canada. https://www.edcan.ca/articles/strategies-for-engagement/

Jacobsen, M., Brown, B., & Lambert, D. (2013). Technology-enhanced learning environments in higher education: A review of the literature. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, (80 pages). http://hdl.handle.net/1880/52244

 

Martin, J. (2019). Building Relationships and Increasing Engagement in the Virtual Classroom. Journal of Educators Online, 16(1), 9-13. https://www.thejeo.com/archive/2019_16_1/martin

 

Mazur, A., Brown, B., & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Learning designs using flipped classroom instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning Technology, 41(2), 1-26. https://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/26977

 

Note: This post is also available on Dr. Michele Jacobsen’s blog

Feel free to connect with us: babrown@ucalgary.ca and dmjacobs@ucalgary.ca  OR Twitter handles: @barbbrown @dmichelej

Two Exciting Master’s Degree Topics in Learning Sciences

Be a Leader in the Digital Age!

You are invited to join us in the Master of Education program, Leading and Learning in a Digital Age. Digital innovation and learning in multimodal contexts are a global focus. Explore the complexities of inclusive and high-quality digital learning environments using online pedagogies. This four-course topic in Learning Sciences is fully online and designed with flexibility for working professionals. You will: (i) examine the implications for designing and leading interdisciplinary and technology-rich learning; (ii) strengthen your competencies in technological literacies; (iii) explore ethics in technology-enhanced learning environments; and (iv) plan for leading and empowering citizenry in a participatory and digital age. Learn alongside instructors and invited guests who are internationally recognized in the educational technology field and experience a highly interactive online learning experience.

Take risks and learn how to use innovative technologies, develop your social learning network, and critically examine the literature and research in the field. Plan to make a difference in your work context to help others navigate the complexities of living and working a digital world. This topic attracts teachers and professionals in educational environments as well as professionals in other fields and disciplinary areas, world-wide.

Apply by March 1, 2021

For more information, contact Academic Coordinator, Dr. Barb Brown, Associate Dean, Teaching and Learning, Werklund School of Education – babrown@ucalgary.ca

Be a Changemaker!

Become a cohort member of this four-course graduate program in education  for those wishing to develop collaborative cultures of creativity in their professional workplaces, classrooms, and across connected networks. Learn to engage in interactivity and empathetic and generative  communication in a way to achieve high levels of collaboration that leverages the strengths of each group and community member to achieve what would be difficult or near impossible as individuals. This program is fully online and designed with flexibility for working professionals. Develop and empower your creative and collaborative potentials and of those around you.

A central feature of this program is continual collaborative engagement in contextual personal and professional creative problem solving across a wide range of real world contexts from the United Nations Sustainable Global Goals to the classroom or professional workplace. This is supported against a backdrop of both action and literature-based research into the fields of creativity, collaboration, and human-centred design. The Collaborative Creativity for Social Innovation and Human-Centred Design program attracts those from diverse educational and  professional backgrounds wishing to engage in a truly unique, transformative experience in a  highly interactive, virtual educational space.

Apply by March 1 , 2021

For more information, contact Academic Coordinator, Dr. Robert Kelly, Associate Professor, Faculty of Arts, University of Calgary – rkelly@ucalgary.ca

NOTE: The  two programs can be taken sequentially and then stacked with a third year (4 research courses) to complete an MEd degree. Alternatively, participants can take any one of the two programs for professional learning purposes (and receive a certificate). Both are offered fully online and completed over one year while working full-time. There are also numerous other program options that can be stacked with these ones if you are looking for a different topic.

Applications are open until March 1, 2021 for programs commencing in July 2021. Visit the MEd Interdisciplinary site for more information and Apply Now through to March 1, 2021!

 

Ethical use of technology in digital learning environments

Brown, B., Roberts, V., Jacobsen, M., Hurrell, C. (Eds.). (2020). Ethical use of technology in digital learning environments: Graduate student perspectives. University of Calgary. https://doi.org/10.11575/ant1-kb38

This open access book is the result of a co-design project in a class in the Masters of Education program at the University of Calgary, Leading and Learning in a Digital Age – https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/graduate-programs/leading-learning-in-digital-age

The course, and the resulting book, focus primarily on the safe and ethical use of technology in digital learning environments. The course was organized according to four topics based on Farrow’s (2016) Framework for the Ethics of Open Education. Students were invited to contribute a chapter and co-design the chapter with their instructor and peers. Behind the scenes, there was a team of editors and research assistants who worked to create the book and publish in the open access format. As a result, there are ten chapters in the book, including nine chapters written by students in the program and an introductory chapter written by the team of editors. It took one full year to complete the book from start to finish. The chapters were drafted during the early part of 2020 and the team of editors carefully reviewed each chapter and continued to work with the chapter authors throughout the year to make revisions and refine each chapter. Finally, the chapters were reviewed by a professional copyeditor prior to publishing the book. It was impressive to see the high level of student engagement and level of commitment demonstrated by the students even after they completed their course work and the program.

If you are interested in learning more about the MEd program in the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary, consider Leading and Learning in a Digital Age – https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/graduate-programs/leading-learning-in-digital-age

Applications for programs starting in July 2021 are now open and close on March 1, 2021.

Exploring the Promise of Online and Blended Pedagogy (Jacobsen & Brown, Nov 30, 2020)

Interactive Technology Demos, Resources and References from our Synchronous Session in the WSE Professional Learning Series: https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/professional-learning-series

Overview:  Good teaching is good teaching whether it occurs online or in blended contexts. One of the myths of online learning is that it is inferior to meeting in person. In this session, we explore how teachers can cultivate strong relationships with students and create the conditions for learning in digital spaces. This session focuses on ways teachers can engage with networked learning communities and access expertise and resources for teaching in diverse contexts. Session slides: Nov30-2020 Slides

Connect with us:

babrown@ucalgary.ca and dmjacobs@ucalgary.ca 

Twitter: @barbbrown @dmichelej

 

Interactive Technology Demos

  • Google slides, Google forms & Google jamboards
  • Zoom videoconferencing
  • Zoom polls, Zoom chat, Zoom annotations, Zoom breakout rooms
  • Using Zoom to Create Messages

Using Zoom to Create a Weekly Video Message for Students

Resources & Networks

  • EdCan Network – https://www.edcan.ca
    • National Educational Association that amplifies how teachers, principals, superintendents, researchers and other education leaders are boldly challenging the status quo.
    • Open access to Education Canada Magazine

References & Readings

Brown, B., & Jacobsen, M. (2020, September 3). Underlying Messages and Myths about Online Learning. Blog:  http://girlprof.blogspot.com/2020/09/underlying-messages-and-myths-about.html

Underlying Messages and Myths about Online Learning

Brown, B., Alonso-Yanez, G., Friesen, S., & Jacobsen, M. (2020). High school redesign: Carnegie unit as a catalyst for change. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy (CJEAP), 193, 97-114. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjeap/article/view/68066

Brown, B. & Eaton, S. E. (2020). Using a community of inquiry lens to examine synchronous online discussions in graduate courses. In L. Wilton, & Brett C. (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Online Discussion-Based Teaching Methods (pp. 229-262), IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3292-8

Brown, B. (2019). One-Take Productions for Student Feedback. Education Canada Magazine, 59(2). https://www.edcan.ca/articles/student-feedback/

Brown, B., Jacobsen, M., & Lambert, D. (2014, May 9-10). Learning technologies in higher education [Paper presentation]. In P. Preciado Babb (Ed.). Proceedings of the IDEAS: Rising to the Challenge Conference, (pp. 25-43). Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, AB, Canada.http://hdl.handle.net/1880/50588

Ferdig, R. E., Baumgartner, E., Hartshorne, R., Kaplan-Rakowski, R., & Mouza, C. (2020). Teaching, Technology & Teacher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Stories from the Field. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education eBook: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/216903/

Friesen, S., Saar, C., Park, A., Marcotte, C., Hampshire, T., Martin, B., Brown, B., & Martin, J. (2015). Focus on Inquiry. [eBook] http://inquiry.galileo.org/

Friesen, S. (2009). What did you do in school today? Teaching Effectiveness: A Framework and Rubric. Canadian Education Association. https://galileo.org/publication/what-did-you-do-in-school-today-teaching-effectiveness-a-framework-and-rubric/

Friesen, S. (2015). “An Inquiry Stance on Practice: How the Process of Inquiry Produces Knowledge”. Focus on Inquiry.  https://inquiry.galileo.org/ch5/an-inquiry-stance-on-practice/

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework – https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/

Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003

Irvine, V. (2020, Oct 26). The Landscape of Merging Modalities. Educause Review, 4. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/10/the-landscape-of-merging-modalities

Jacobsen, M., Friesen, S., & Lock, J. (2013). Strategies for Engagement: Knowledge building and intellectual engagement in participatory learning environments. Education Canada, https://www.edcan.ca/articles/strategies-for-engagement/ 

Jacobsen, M., Brown, B., & Lambert, D. (2013). Technology-enhanced learning environments in higher education: A review of the literature. Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, (80 pages).http://hdl.handle.net/1880/52244

Martin, J. (2019). Building Relationships and Increasing Engagement in the Virtual Classroom. Journal of Educators Online, 16(1), 9-13. https://www.thejeo.com/archive/2019_16_1/martin

Mazur, A. D., Brown, B., & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Learning Designs using Flipped Classroom Instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 41(2), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2PG7P

Minero, E. (2020, August). Educators turn to Bitmoji to build community and engagement. Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/educators-turn-bitmoji-build-community-and-engagement

Stelmach, B. M., Hunter, D. M., Brown, B., O’Connor, B., & Brandon, J. (2019). Optimum Learning for All Students: Highlights from the Research Literature. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/110447

Tucker, C. (2020, August 19). Asynchronous vs. Synchronous: How to Design for Each Type of Learning. https://catlintucker.com/2020/08/asynchronous-vs-synchronous/

Werklund School of Education Research Partnership. Optimum Learning for All Students: Implementing Alberta’s 2018 Professional Practice Standards. Online: https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/community-engagement/partner-research-schools/research-partnerships/optimum-learning-all

 

This post is also available on Dr. Jacobsen’s site –http://girlprof.blogspot.com/2020/11/exploring-promise-of-online-and-blended.html

 

Technology Used to Support Learning in Groups

 

Brown, B., & Thomas, C. (2020). Technology used to support learning in groups. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 35(1), 1-26. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/1158/1802

Abstract: Across disciplines, researchers recognize that working together in a small group can be a challenging learning activity, particularly in an online course where group members meet remotely. This 2-year, design-based research study focused on improving group work in both online and blended sections of an undergraduate course for pre-service teachers. Surveys were completed by instructors (N=15) and students (N=361) at three different junctures during the course to learn about how technologies were used by students and instructors to support group work. Interviews were also conducted at the end of the term to gather in-depth descriptions about the types of technologies and how they were used by students and instructors to support group work. Findings indicated that students and instructors selected a combination of technologies, including institutionally supported and mainstream applications such as shared workspaces to coordinate, track, and monitor group progress. Students and instructors also described using communication technologies to manage group challenges related to scheduling, communicating, and integrating tasks into the project. Findings contribute to our understanding about how technologies were used to support process and product when working on a group assignment