Skip to main content

My quick thoughts, back stage, and rants as I try to Teach kids about the Web while learning how to help others build a better Web.

IndieWebRing

Come Journey Through the IndieWeb Sites

🕸💍

Greg McVerry

Week One Module for #edu506 @scsu studentd building up their skills in teachign online literacies in k12 classrooms

Goals:  Explore methods to make our online classes a caring place where every student know what it takes to succeed. Objectives: Analyze how you applied elements of Community

2 min read

Goals: 

Explore methods to make our online classes a caring place where every student know what it takes to succeed.

Objectives:
  • Analyze how you applied elements of Community of Inquiry to your first week
  • Explain why intentional hospitality matters in online learning.
Read

Skim the readings for the salient points. Try to survive this week. I debated just giving you an infographic but I went full source in case you return.

Bali, M., Caines, A., Hogue, R. J., DeWaard, H. J., & Friedrich, C. (2019). I ntentionally Equitable Hospitality in Hybrid Video Dialogue: The context of virtually connecting. eLearn, 2019(5), 5.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010). The first decade of the community of inquiry framework: A retrospective. The internet and higher education, 13(1-2), 5-9.

Write

Share a reflection of your first day.

Share yoru daily and/or weekly schedule

Participate

You took pride in designing your classroom. Your online class should be the same. Over time you can add all the paint and posters, get all the student work hung up, make anchor charts.

For now less is more.

  • Get a piece a paper,
  • Draw out the text structure of a "class period" or "day" depending on your k12 school gets set up.
  • You get no more than four boxes.
  • Now make this layout in Google Classroom.
  • Provide a shot of your paper and the classroom template (NO student data can be displayed)
Reflection

This first week with your students your major focus has to be on social presence and intentional hospitality. Share the strategies you used to keep learning social while creating an environment where students know you care.

 

 

Greg McVerry

Hey @scsu I wanted to share some insights we have had as we build and facilitate trainings to get ready for the 100% move online #edchat #literacies #edtechchat #highered

As our students will return to campus without setting a foot on campus we need to ensure we approach the week with care and compassion

3 min read

As our students will return to campus without setting a foot on campus we need to ensure we approach the week with care and compassion and then build out a space for learning using four better practices:

  • Use Asynchronous Communication
  • Use Simple Predictable Design
  • Focus On Teacher Presence
  • Provide Timely Feedback

Make Your Class Asynchronous

We have been providing training to many of you on two delivery methods:

  • asynchronous techniques using videos, readings, assignment, and Blackboard
  • synchronous techniques using chat and video apps like Microsoft Teams and WebEx

While as a faculty member you have the academic freedom to design your course in any manner that uses tools supported by the University we wanted to share some better practices:

The majority of your course should be asynchronous. While many faculty may want to just open WebEx or Microsoft Teams, launch the video chat, and teach during their assigned face to face class time this is not considered better practice.

  • Many of your students will be newly unemployed and have child care issues to figure out. Being available at specific times may not be possible to many. Conducting the majority of your classes asynchronously will help ensure every student can succeed.
  • Your synchronous chats should be used to supplement your class and increase your social presence. Better practice would not rely on live chat as your primary delivery system

Keep Your Design Simple

You need to keep your instructional design simple and predictable. For the next few weeks less is more. Provide as few tools to students as possible. Come up with a design for your modules (we made a course template) that you can repeat each week or each two weeks.

Focus on Teaching Presence

After simple design your teaching presence is the most important practice. Set aside 1-2 hours a day for teaching each class and another 1hour per class for delivering feedback. At a minimum you should post a note to each students' first post. Make sure you are posting a minimum of four days a week.

Try so send daily or weekly announcement. A short email, video, or audio announcement can help keep students engaged.
Email messages are very powerful. Send words of encouragement or feedback occasionally to student emails. Research shows this to be a very effective practice at increasing student engagement.

Timely Feedback

We are all worried about the increased work load but we know timely feedback ensures student success in online learning. First begin by asking if your assessments are important. Will they make a difference to student lives in 5 years. If you are doing the assessment for just a grade or accreditation it doesn't really serve a learning purpose and may not be needed.

Think about more frequent and shorter assessments. Use low stakes or ungraded assessments. Rely on peer assessments. Remember feedback, and not the assessment tools and grades we assign, drive learning.

Greg McVerry

Questions About the "Case Study" #edu506

When enough students ask you for clarification you realize that your assignment description needs improvement. This is happening with the "case study" assignment in #edu506. I

3 min read

When enough students ask you for clarification you realize that your assignment description needs improvement.

This is happening with the "case study" assignment in . I put case study in quotes because the assignment does not reflect our shared definition of a case study. My original error was calling a thing the wrong thing.

Instead of a case study where you are given a situation to consider, compare, or solve, students in will do a collaborative essay.

Why A Collaborative Essay

  • Research based methods for improving writing
  • Prepare you to teach through inquiry in elementary classrooms
  • Increase social presence in an online classroom

Research Based Writing Instruction

While it is based on research among older students the lesson of Writing Next ring true in elementary school (just as the best teaching in pre-school works in college).

The meta-analysis, a type of research that synthesizes multiple empirical studies, found eleven strategies that improve writing. Among the recommendations: collaborative essays and using the writing process.

The assignment, where you are writing two different essays ask you to consider to questions:

  • Should we focus on content knowledge or comprehension strategy instruction?
  • Should we level books in our classroom libraries and curriculum?

By working together on this essay you will gain practice and create evidence of growth around the ability to integrate multiple sources, use sources from class and optionally supplement these with your research, and present a well organized argument.

You will submit an essay around 450-500 words for each inquiry questions.

Prepare You Teach Through Inquiry

When teachers assign oprojects they often neglect students on the process of completing the inquiry process. As future elementary teachers you need to know how to teach through inquiry and how to teach argumentative writing. This assignment builds in opportunities to practice both. You will develop a plan to complete the assignment. Create a rubric to assess your writing, and finally reflect on the process. These are the same steps you will need to use as a teacher.

Develop a Plan

In terms of developing a plan and a schedule start at the due date 2020-03-17 and work backwards. Look at the tasks to be completed and choose a date for each. Develop a communication plan (face to face, phone Blackboard) and agree on a workflow (will you use Google docs, Office, etc).

Make a rubric

Then make the rubric. Look at the writing standards for fifth grade, specifically those focused on knowledge integration and argumentation. Choose 3-4 skills and develop them into criteria. Set what you think would be goal on each criterion.

Reflect on Process

You also need to create opportunities for students to reflect on their learning in order for learning to occur. Reflecting on writing and the inquiry process helps you grow.

Increase Social Presence

As we have discussed success in online classes takes your cognitive presence and social presence. I want us to use the group studies to focus on our social presence. Online learning does not mean learning alone. Stay in contact with each other, agree on a plan, and stick to the goals.

Greg McVerry

Responses on XMCA listserv on question of Implicit and Explicit Knowledge

In reply to My convulted stream Hi Greg, This question and distinction originally interested me when I was trying to work out what intuition is. "Implicit" hides

6 min read

In reply to My convulted stream

Hi Greg,

This question and distinction originally interested me when I was trying to work out what intuition is. "Implicit" hides a variety of meanings and sense, whereas explicit is narrower in range and can be connoted with sign, and hence this aspect can be linked with Vygotsky.  To the extent that I have studied Peirce, his object and interpretant seem to have agreement too.


From wikipedia: "Tolman also promoted the concept known as latent learning first coined by Blodgett (1929)"
Polanyi (1958) referred to tacit knowledge quite extensively.  There were a number of other authors that I read contemporary with Polanyi.

P. I. Zinchenko's (1939) study on voluntary and involuntary learning gives experimental accounts of these two different methods of learning.

Best,
Huw

On the hunt

Keith Johnson, one of the professors on my MA at University of Essex,used the distinction between implicit and explicit on the one hand, and the J.R. Anderson model of DECPRO, PRODEC on the other. He didn't say anything about conditional knowledge, but from Anderson I gather it's something to do with the passive reception/active production distinction (that we Halllidayans reject). 
I never heard him use both of them together, in a matrix, so that there was implicit and explicit declarative knowledge, implicit and explicit procedural knowledge, and implicit and explicit conditional knowledge. But Keith was very GRAMMATICAL. It seems to me that if you apply it to PHONOLOGY, there isn't any reason we can't talk about implicit and explicit declarative knowledge (knowing THAT a sound is a /d/ and not a /t/ implicitly and being able to express that idea in phonological terms) and it is also possible to talk about implicit and explicit procedural knowledge (knowing HOW to distinguish them without thinking about it, and knowing HOW they are distinguished by the movements of the articulators). I don't see any reason in principle why you couldn't do the same thing with conditional knowledge either, although I'm not really sure that all these distinctions are relevant to teaching. 
All of this, and a lot more, in his 19i96 book Skill Learning and Language Teaching (Blackwell).
David KelloggSangmyung University

New Article: Han Hee Jeung & David Kellogg (2019): A story without SELF: Vygotsky’s
pedology, Bruner’s constructivism and Halliday’s construalism in understanding narratives byKorean children, Language and Education, DOI: 10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663
Some e-prints available at:https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/KHRxrQ4n45t9N2ZHZhQK/full?target=10.1080/09500782.2019.1582663
All of this is in his 1996 book Skill Learning and Language Teaching (Blackwell). Greg,
I'm not sure about implicit *knowledge*, but the earliest studies on implicit *learning* were conducted by Arthur Reber in the 1960s. I had the good fortune of being a graduate student at CUNY Graduate Center in Developmental Psychology in the 1980s when Arthur was there as a visiting scholar. He was studying implicit learning of *grammar* by adults and children. What struck me about the phenomenon (then and now) is that subjects in experiments are unaware that they are engaged in implicit learning - and when asked to think about the task they are performing while they are learning to infer patterns implicitly, their performance deteriorates significantly. It would seem that implicit and explicit learning are activities that conflict with each other.

This info may not be at all relevant to your question, but I thought I should mention it.
Cheers,PeterI think you'd need to qualify that statement, Peter, for it to be correct.
The use of the phrase "involuntary" in P. I. Zinchenko's work pertains to "without volition" rather than "against one's volition".
Best,Huw

mike cole

Jun 14, 2019, 1:05 PM (3 days ago)
   
 

The same distinction can be found usefully in the work of Giyoo Hatano which you might find useful,Greg. A distinction is found in Wright's book on Envisioning Real Utopias between ideologyand culture.
Odd query:  Earth worms have an enormous effect on their environments and hence ours. Earth worms could not do this if they did not have "wiggle room." Would you attribute thetunnels and soil transformation of earth worms to them "having" agency? 

Also, I believe Palermo and Weiner made this distinction in the late 70s.  I would check their classic textbook on cognitive psychology (if it’s still around.)  And, Polanyi addressed these issues too.  Best, ag

 

Artin Goncu, Ph.D

Professor, Emeritus

University of Illinois at Chicago

www.artingoncu.com/

Can the earthworms consider the consequences of wiggiling this way or that and predicting the consequences of these choices or do they follow an almost programmatic biological following. If so is this agency and still learning in emodoed ways? 
I do keep a worm box those worms are more than cared for but not free? Are they missing agency?
----------I think I will disagree. Bits of explicit learning embedded into implicit events when you have explicit goals make a difference.
Meaning in the two spaces I am studying and people engage in explicit learning all the time. They need to make a gif or learn CSS. 
Yet other times folks muck about trying new things.
In each of these events people may have an overarching goal... As I type I am drawn to Dewey and Art and Experience. 
I do find embedding skills in a passion whrn I teach web development is key. Is Passion implicit learning or the most explicit imaginable?

Yes, when there is even flow, you feel entirely free, its our way or the highway. :-)And yes to dewey!

mike

Kind of why I wish I did not have to name things. Just say they "learn" then we don't cut knowledge off to the world.
I am going to try to grab thos thread and concurrent threads on Twitter and try to mix them together 
Thank you to all, All the books in thread requested through my library. 

 

Vygotsky showed in his work on child development (Problem of Age, for example) that the will is not born free all at once, and is in fact never free absolutely. Hegel gives us an extended discourse on free will in The Philosophy of Right, beginning with the transformation of the 'natural will' into the 'free will' with the creatures who use culture to control their own activity. But is takes social transformation to take the will beyond a Spinozan/Stoic resignation.

Nature-given drives and culture-given norms do not cancel freedom of will absolutely, but I think it makes no sense to talk about "agency" or freedom of the will other than actions passing through consciousness, with or without conscious awareness. But of course, if you are an Althusserian or Foucauldian, "agency" is taken in the sense of being the unwitting agent transmitting a disease, under which meaning, the earthworm has as much agency as Napoleon.

Andy

https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/Article_on_Teleology.pdf

Greg McVerry

Reviewer Comments from @IESResearch and #QuestionTheWeb #literacies

Last August we submitted the following grant application to @IESResearch to address the critical literacy online....We were not funded. I attach the reviewer comments to help others

6 min read

Last August we submitted the following grant application to @IESResearch to address the critical literacy online....We were not funded.

I attach the reviewer comments to help others who live and die by the same rat race as federal research.

 

Some Notes

Reviewer One

One argument made in the application is that “for effective writing instruction to occur—reading instruction cannot be separate.” However, it was not clear how reading instruction was a part of this project. It is not entirely clear if this intervention involves providing students with the platform and simply letting them use it or if it involves some form of instruction other than chatbots providing suggestions. 

Either the review quit reading too soon or we did not make the second phase of the intervention clear where participants encounter BIASED READ ALOUDs performed by avatars.....Literally, animated and annotated videos discussing text structure and reinforcing confirmatory bias......

But we will have to make the connection more clear that when students curate and resources they also have to READ. The web is a read/write environment. IES has never understood this.

 It was not entirely clear why the project focuses on seventh grade. It would be helpful to provide a more detailed description of the instruction that will accompany the online platform that students will use. It was challenging to identify what students would be taught and how they would be taught, other than getting advice from chatbots. It was clear that the applicants want students to assume control over the process. It is important to explain how this approach aligns with what is currently known about effective writing instruction. It appears that the avatars will read aloud to students, but it was not clear what the rationale was for having students listen to the information rather than read it for themselves.

We literally cited the CCSS standards for 7th grade, plus COPPA...you can't do tech studies under 13 way too much work.

The reviewer equated the biased think alouds with "being read to" they missed the entire point of the study. We do not recognize bias because we do not consider how perspective shape truth....They were getting BIASED read alouds so they would recognize how credibility markers are reinforced or ignored due to perspective. We will need to make this more clear.

Psychometric information for the planned assessments needs to be provided (AWC-SBA, surveys). In the description of the writing assessment, the applicants plan to wait until Year 4 to score all the students’ writing. This seems like a missed opportunity to provide feedback during the design studies in the first years of the project.

I think the reviewer skipped the entire paragraph from their reading (taken from our proposal)

In 2013, NWP developed the AWC for Source-Based Argument (AWC-SBA) to focus on specific features of source-based argument writing. In adapting the AWC, NWP reviewed extant argument writing rubrics (e.g., the Smarter Balanced and PARCC rubrics). The AWC-SBA retain the AWC’s basic structure rooted in the “six traits” of writing but each has a particular focus on the attributes related to source-based argument writing. The AWC-SBA measures four attributes: content (e.g., quality of reasoning and strength of evidence); structure (e.g., organization to enhance the argument); stance (e.g., tone, establishment of credibility); and conventions (e.g., control of usage, punctuation, spelling, capitalization, and paragraphing). The AWC-SBA has been used in three large-scale scorings in large-scale scorings (n>5,000) and performed similarly to the original AWC. For example, reliability estimates for the AWC-SBA ranged from 89%–92% on each attribute (Gallagher, Arshan, & Woodworth, 2016).

We reported these measures and we also explained why waiting to year 4 to score the test actualy reduces measure bias. This is a major assessment provided by the National Writing Project...We did not pick some unheard of measure, nor develop our own measure to prove our own intervention works.....

At the very least, ICCs should be estimated, and the project should be prepared to run multilevel models if there is sufficient classroom-level variability. 

On a 1.4 million dollar budget? You crazy???? They want sample sizes that will have enough power for multi-level models....for a Developmental Grant....a goal 4 grant maybe....but not a goal 2 developmental grant.

It was not entirely clear if the institutions supporting the research team offered the fairly sophisticated resources needed to mount and manage the online platform that is central to this project. Also, two of the institutions are not research-intensive institutions, so it would be helpful to have more details about their ability to manage both the communication challenges and data analysis needs for this project. 

IES has such a bias against schools of access. The system is almost explicity designed to ensure the rich stay rich and federal dollars do not trickle down to the schools that actually serve communities of color. Just because I don't work at some fancy pants r1 school with the same white kids from the same white picket fence lives does not mean I can't do data analysis.

So insulting.

Instead of ensuring federal research dollars reach all institutions we create a silo where the reviewers ensure all dollars stay at the r1 levels thus protecting their own bottom lines.

We need to break the inequity machine that this bias reinforces.

Reviewer Two

The richness of the planned intervention components seemed somewhat connected from a strong, systematic theory of change. Vague references were made to concepts of discourse, community, and identity. However, ideally, each of the elements of the intervention would have been systematically justified within the context of the theory of change. As one example, how exactly might students benefit from curating and vetting sources for each other?

Reviewer Two did not like our Theory of change. I thought it was quite good. They wanted us to explain all of the reading and writing research into the theory including going as far as justifying why having kids work together is a good idea...I liked our theory of change. We will revise it. Then next year's reviewers will suggest we needed something more like we just proposed.

In Summary

Reviewer A didn't like our quantitative measures and looks down upon faculty who do not serve in the ivory halls of R1 schools. Review B did not like our qualitative methods or our theory of change. Reviewer B could has some valid points but neither reviewer understood how we would use parsing, scraping websites for metadata to surface to new evidence of knowledge growth.

We will submit again. I hope the bias IED reviewers have against Universities who serve under-represented peoples does not doom our efforts forever.

 

Greg McVerry

Bad news @IESResearch decided not to fund #QuestionTheWeb

In the screenshot above you will see "Not Applicable" in the final score column. Based on the email from IES this means our application  was

2 min read

In the screenshot above you will see "Not Applicable" in the final score column. Based on the email from IES this means our application  was not strong enough to even warrant a discussion about funding.

I am awful at writing grants....Scratch that I am good at writing grants...I spend 20-30 every week trying to write grants to help bring digital literacy education to a place it needs to be.

I am really awful at winning grants.

Almost everything here...if is more than $10,000 goes unfunded. It is so stressful, you write and write abandoning every other aspect of your life to try and find funds to make the world better and people constantly tell you you are not good enough.

If they tell you anything at all. Half the grants you apply for just say no.

This grant was spot on.

Solve a critical problem: Critical evaluation

Strong advisory panel: Best in the world

Theory of Change driving methods: Spot on

I have another two grants I am working to finish this week and then a an NSF grant to submit on 4/1. Right now I feel like I should just stop trying. What's the point? For eight years I have tried to win 500-2 million dollar grants. For eight years I strike out every time.

At some point I might just need to admit I am not meant to play the game.

Greg McVerry

My Random Collection of Slidedecks on Workshop Methods #edu407 #edu305

Hey #edu307 and #edu405 below are links to many of the slidedecks I have curated and created over the years. I wish I was better at

2 min read

Hey and below are links to many of the slidedecks I have curated and created over the years. I wish I was better at knowing who made what originally but images and videos and slides I found got mismatched together.

I will record videos for some of these throughout the week but here you go:

Workshop Methods

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1B31Xz9VFi22LdWN7EExWwObrLh3B5M_7Ox5jicp92XQ/edit?usp=sharing

Readers Worskhop Conferences (some mine mainly someone else;s):

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/14bwKJkwEJW2QQuu5cDcEC4yb_Q3iy1YJYxMXCsASakM/edit?usp=sharing

Reader's Workshop (not mine)

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1JIXuApXZxT81mrLbBbV40_ZZJqv8VDQSlHpJDzq6doQ/edit?usp=sharing

Writer's Conference (remix mainly someone else's)

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1k67BjNqyMqU1DCc8nKSJIa5v-wK_jcSMWCnNIqQ13xM/edit?usp=sharing

Writer's notebook

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Z4jywGX-VuW41CxvsosmD54IXj77jL8ijiyGsBwzRiM/edit?usp=sharing

Tag TEAM Writers worskhop

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RP1y7ZOd8Mfql7Haas_JjbpOzfzOcE5bnWTej2EHQMM/edit?usp=sharing

Reader's Notebook

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1sLoNABt1ogXxbDPLs2Ei-qa36cjNPUy0dCZVhzY08fQ/edit?usp=sharing

Talking and Writing About Texts

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1JP9T8XwWj9AAfmByT3iNP76uTLoH0ENq9w--fnO3dEA/edit?usp=sharing

Teaching notetaking

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1O1FlnDlMni9qPb4UR3tfRGPgH8AgQbH98w7Yai-ZDBM/edit?usp=sharing

Reader's Workshop

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1B31Xz9VFi22LdWN7EExWwObrLh3B5M_7Ox5jicp92XQ/edit?usp=sharing

Greg McVerry

Submitted Application for the @Mozilla Responsible Computer Science Challenge

Concept Description:   The Computer Science Department, Research Center on Computing and Society, and School of Education at Southern Connecticut State University propose this work to fund

21 min read

Concept Description:

 

The Computer Science Department, Research Center on Computing and Society, and School of Education at Southern Connecticut State University propose this work to fund the creation of a Virtual Reality recording and editing studio, with accompanying coursework on storytelling and WebVR.

Specifically, this project will fund the creation of the VR lab and openly licensed pedagogical materials other computer science departments could use to learn ethics, WebVR , or both. Through these courses students will create scalable, remixable content around issues of ethics in computer science in order to leave our program understanding of ethics as a first-design principle.

The project will proceed in two stages. The Responsible Computer Science Challenge award will fund the first stage. During the first stage we will develop the animation and WebVR lab as well as the curriculum. Successful results of this stage will lead us to seek follow up funding to design a dual-purpose Virtual Reality live recording studio while maintaining planetarium functionality.

Stage One, funded by the Responsible Computer Science Challenge, is a formative design research project that revolves around the  pedagogical goal of understanding how perspectives, history, and personality shape ethics and technology. We will develop a class cross listed in philosophy and computer science will teach digital storytelling through narratives of ethics and revise computer science classes in web design and security to include WebVR.

SCSU  is uniquely qualified for this award. Our Research Center on Computing and Society, founded and led by Terrell Ward Bynum, has explored the ethics of computer science and technology since 1988. Dr Heidi Lockwood, Professor of Philosophy, will join the project. Dr. Lisa Lancor, Professor and Chair of the Computer Science Department will serve as Principal Investigator on the Project. Dr. Greg McVerry, Assistant Professor, Curriculum and Learning, and long-time Mozilla contributor, will lead our efforts to facilitate the development of course curricula  that align our long history of exploring ethics and computer science with theories of open pedagogy.

Theoretical Principles

We draw on John Dewey and see digital literacies and ethics in computer science as necessary for efforts in democratic education. The pedagogy used will center around production-based inquiry methods. We will also encourage all participants to reflect openly on a blogging platform. We will encourage further involvement of the larger Mozilla WebVR community in the project

Why WebVR

We believe webVR has the greatest reach and impact when teaching ethics. While the cost of full virtual reality rigs and the computer to power these systems are out of reach for most of the global population, WebVR is accessible to anyone with a phone and Mozilla’s virtual reality web browser.

Open Pedagogy

Every participant will have their own website domain and a  content management system. Our theoretical underpinning is that agency and belief in oneself as a writer is essential in order to engage in the reflective thought required in ethics education. In today’s networked society (Castells & Cardozza, 2006), a new set of skills and practices have emerged, and we must design for diversity and inclusivity by acknowledging computer science has not been a safe space (boyd, 2018) (1,137 characters)

Formative Design

Collect Baseline Data

We will begin with focus group interviews with students who have completed CSC 235 Web and Database Development and ask about how they felt the class integrated lessons of technology and allowed them to develop their own space online. This class will include introductions to building A-Frame as students learn HTML.

We will also collect efficacy data about how participants feel towards storytelling. They will be asked to choose a picutre from a set and explain how the picture represents how they feel about their skill level. 

Develop Learning Interventions

We will then create and file the necessary paperwork for our new and revised courses. These courses will be designed in conjunction with our students and assigned a license that allows for . We will work with Mozillians already creating content on Glitch to develop WebVR tutorials.

Implement Interventions

We will then implement the courses and collect student feedback. The class will be open to SCSU for credit but open to global participants to play and contribute. Data will be triangulated using their blog posts and plus delta charts at multiple time points.

Analyze Data

After the first run of classes we will analyze the data to determine which factors inhibited and which factors supported our pedagogical goals.

Iterate on Learning Interventions

We will then revise the coursework and run the classes again.

Analyze Data

Finally, we will analyze  data one last time using content analysis to identify themes that brought us closer to our pedagogical goals.

 

 

 

Working Open:

 

We will open this project to the wider computer science and WebVR world. In fact, as we write this proposal, we welcome Pull Requests and issues at GitHub

Open Begins on Your Own Domain

As we develop this project, all participants will be encouraged to blog and share their reflections and learnings.  We believe working open involves not only "documenting and sharing your concept with broader audiences",  but inviting  audiences to get involved and help shape both the project and our openly networked space for learning.

To this end, all participants from the PI to each student will be given a url and a blog. We will use a social reader and technologies called to connect learners.

Open Pedagogy

The two courses designed for this class will carry an open license. In fact, they will be built using readily available tools. Members of Mozilla's WebVR community have already expressed interest in both designing and taking the course.

Open Data and Privacy

No participant will be required to share openly and will have full control to license their own content as long as they meet the requirements of any reused code or previously licensed content.( 

 

 

 

Internet Health:

 

In a recent survey on Internet Health, specifically the future of connected devices, Mozilla found that those who identify as ultra nerds are more optimistic about the web than those not always online. This result mirror's danah boyd's twentieth anniversary critique of John Berry Barlow's original manifesto. Ultra-nerds come from a place of privilege, and this usually means white, male, and from the global north. We never designed the web for diversity because the original designers had never felt threatened, were never stalked. This explains why, even today, Amnesty International find female journalists get attacked every ten seconds online

In college I did have a stalker. It was a very scary experience. I come to technology with a different perspective because of that experience. It is not a matter of techno panic but a matter of self-preservation....lots of people in Silicon Valley who have never had a Stalker. They are not thinking like that. If you get more people involved that have had …well…Diversity improves technology in a way that makes regulation less necessary Stacey Higginbotham, This Week in Google.

We seek to improve internet health by ensuring that ethics, especially the areas of diversity and inclusion, gets taught as a principle of first design. WebVR provides a useful avenue for this approach as we can put hypothetical characters in situations that would not be ethical to do to real humans. Furthermore, early research into counseling, PTSD, and autism finds virtual reality may help to improve empathy.

We will utilize a series of case studies as models and encourage students to record and create A-Frame content. The use of a WebVR first approach also allows us to reach a much larger audience with our message of ethics in computer science. While the price point on high end virtual reality rig  the cost makes it inaccessible to almost 100% of the world population. Anyone with a smartphone and a compatible lens can use WebVR.

Our MVP case studies we propose and will develop with our students include:

  • Greening the Web: Do you really need React or Blockchain when HTML will do?
  • Code of Conduct: Better conferences or Kangaroo Court?
  • False Positives: Do Algorithms protect us?
  • HTML First: A Matter of ?

Our students will then work in distributed teams with open participants across the web to create additional case studies.

 

 

 

 

A scan of scholarly articles and a survey of virtual reality and computer science specialists found no evidence of anyone else trying to teach ethics through the use of WebVR. We posted messages to GitHub repos, Telegram, Twitter, and Slack in communities that focus on webVR.

While we did not find anyone currently doing similar work, we did find a large expressed interest from people who want to contribute. In fact, we are already collaborating with the two most popular A-Frame  teachers in the greater Mozilla networks.

However recent outreach on Twitter https://twitter.com/jgmac1106/status/1088453939861712897 lead to emergin connections to other researchers in the State of Connecticut may lead to partnerships on scale up efforts. 

 

 

 

 

Key Personnel

Dr. Lisa Lancor (an 8.3% effort, or 1.0)will enable her to oversee course development and program instruction as well as administration of the project funds. Dr. Lancor will also revise courses following their operation and analyze data collected.

Co-PI Greg McVerry (a 9.4% effort, or 1.13 Academic Months). He  will act as a pedagogy and instructional design expert helping to design courses. Dr. McVerry will also coordinate with third party developers creating learning tools. He will also devote 0.5 Summer Months above and beyond his normal duties to the project, for an additional 4.2% effort

Additional salary support for Co-PI Heidi Lockwood (a 2.7% effort, or 0.3 Summer Month) 4% of time will provide assistance in applying the philosophy of ethics to our course design.

Other Personnel

Student 1 $15 per hour for 20 hr/wk. This student will help to record and edit instructional videos, data collection, provide four hours of open online office hours for help, and spend four hours documenting the program through our website and social media.

Student 2 will be paid $12 per hour for 10 hr/wk  He or she will handle  office logistics and filing of university required paperwork. They will provide technical assistance in the lab during class time. 

Fringe Benefits

Fringe benefits for are protected under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Dr. Lancor  64.70% rate on summer work; Dr. McVerry 83.47% rate on course release and 49.72% rate on summer; Dr. Lockwood  72.73% on summer work. Students do not receive fringe during the academic year.

Materials and Supplies

Insta360 Pro II Spherical VR 360 8K Camera, Extra Battery & Charger Kit, $6,000

 Audio recording equipment $4,000

3 Garmin VIRB 360 Action Camera $2,100

Audio remixing and studio equipment, $2,900

5 high-end desktops or laptops $20,0000

Other

  • Professional Installation, 2000 for the set-up of the audio recording studio
  • Developer, Malcom Blaney, [FJ1]  at $75 for 65 hours.; Create a ledger and micropub client for issuing and recording webmention badges. and HTML.
  • Developer, Grant Richardson, $9,000 at $75 for 120 hours; Create a lightweight blogging CMS using nodejs. Include webmentions, indieauth, and micropub endpoints. Create a microformats parser for tracking class participation. 

Indirect Costs: SCSU maintains a negotiated indirect cost agreement with DHHS. Copies of SCSU’s NICRA are available upon request.

 

 

Risks:

 

As a university sponsored project, all research activity funded by this grant will require approval from the SCSU  Institutional Review Board and any consent and assent from participants.

Humane Tech isn't Engineered

Mindsets do not shift easily. Many developers look to engineer their way to the perfect social solution. This world belief that "Code can save the world, but only I can write it" traces its roots, as Sara Wachter-Boettcher (2017) points out, back to bias engineered into computer science since the 1950's when  identified loner men as the most apt for programming and then built assessments to identify these types of employees. Yet  of bias of perfection, impostor syndrome to explicit bias around competition, verbal discourse, and neurodiversity have weeded their way through all of our history (Banaji & Greenwald, 2017).

We cannot code our way to better community. While what we engineer reflects our bias, engineering alone can never overcome perspectives and pasts. Instead we must carve anew; placing our principles before our pull  requests. To overcome the risk of settled mindsets we will first put a focus on listening to voices who tech does not serve or has not served safely.

We will then root the story of ethics in Computer Science into the narratives of at-risk populations. We will study the shape of the story and come to understand how the prescriptive technologies (Ursula, 2004) control the shape of stories we tell. We will then create narratives through the webVR case studies.

This does introduce the risk of too many possibilities. Amy Burvall notes that constraints lead to greater creativity. We will mitigate this risk by first focusing on creating webVR using A-Frame technologies as a proof of concept before scaling up to a full virtual reality recording studio.

However, we will provide everyone with a Domain  of their own and a blog to ensure they own their stories.

Interdisciplinary Approach

Our use of webVR and A-Frame will require computer science engineers to study digital storytelling and narratology while English and education majors study computer science. The populations served by many community colleges and state universities in the United States have multiple jobs and families to raise. Adding additional domains of knowledge to already crowded curriculum can add stress to the lives of students.

To mitigate these risks, we will add additional scaffolds, a network of open participants, bi-monthly face to face meetings, and on-demand video tutorials.  We will also stress importance of community in Open Pedagogy and encourage participants to rely on each other and the knowledge we create and curate together.

Open and Privacy

Online communication, such as tweets, blog posts, and comments are generally out in the open and technically “public” and available for researchers to analyze and quote. Internet researchers have, however, documented how a particular communication may be technically public but viewed by the individual who posted it as meant for a more limited or private context.

Even if an individual feels that they have “published” in public or have consented to be part of research, they might still feel like trust has been violated if their words are taken up and re-framed in a way that they feel is out of context or misrepresented. While this study will seek IRB approval, we also have stringent rules around users:

·       We will analyze and publish data that is de-identified or aggregated in ways that cannot be traced back to an individual.

  • Any identifiable quotes or descriptions of activities will not be used in a research publication or presentation without the permission of the individual. This includes anonymized or pseudonymized quotes, because they can be linked back through a search engine to an individual public posting.

Participants may also be contacted and recruited to participate in surveys and interviews for specific research studies. In these cases, we will offer a clear explanation of the consent and privacy procedures, how the data will be used, and what benefit the research will provide to the individual and the community. We will also allow interviewees the opportunity to review transcripts and quotes.

No student will be required to join the study. In fact, someone beside the class instructor will collect permissions and the teaching professor will not know who agreed to be included until grades are submitted.  Participants may be asked to complete an additional consent form that will be reviewed and approved by our Institutional Review Board..

 

 

Student Audience:

 

At Southern Connecticut State University, we design for a future where there is no separate tech industry, for we embrace the truth of the present that every industry is now a tech industry. Therefore, our entry level class in the program will be offered to all students as part of our Liberal Education Program. This class will focus on the structure of storytelling, character development, and storytelling.

We will fork and also participate in the online class . This distributed learning community is the longest continuously running MOOC  and will connect our Southern students to open web advocates from across the globe. These students will be invited to join our efforts at developing ethical case studies using traditional new media.

All of our Computer Science undergraduate and graduate students take a class in computer ethics. All the case studies developed as part of this grant will be deployed in this class to be used by all of our computer science classes.

We will also revise our graduate level ethical hacking class to include case studies specifically around the ethics of privacy and security. Every computer science graduate class offers this program.

We will also develop and propose a new class on learning A-Frame and WebVR. While students will not complete case studies in this class, they will take storyboards and scripts students wrote in DS106, apply greater disciplinary and tier-three academic language, then develop the webVR files using the editing studio funded by this grant.

 

All the material we create from this class, including participant blogs, will be made openly available on the Glitch platform and GitHub. We have already started to work with collaborators who have created A-Frame tutorials and host these files on Glitch as well. Participants will maintain the right to license their content  however they choose.

This strategy of providing locally curated content that we also open to the web at large will lead to the greatest number of students to be involved in the grant. Working openly also provides a greater voice for our students to get involved in the design of the classes and the projects. The SCSU computer science club has expressed an interest and reported to the department they would like instruction in virtual reality. Any student member can join the steering committee simply by showing up to a meeting or filing a pull request on the team repo.

We also hope computer science, philosophy, business or education schools take up and use the case studies developed by our students. While we believe the learning and knowledge students gain by creating, editing and animating their videos will lead to greater knowledge growth, we will also develop the curriculum for programs that would just like to utilize our series of case studies.

The tutorials on A-Frame and WebVR that we will develop in conjunction with the Mozilla Virtual Reality community will also reach thousands. Having  tutorials framed around e ethics will further reinforce the concept that diversity and inclusion need to be a first design principle.

While traditional instructional design places a priority on learning objectives, ethics in computer science can never work this way. Inclusion should never be a rubric. No one should get a “2.7 proficient in diversity” score. Creating a culture of ethics as a first principle of design requires us to reshape society and not learners.

As Gary Stager points out (2005 pg 3), a focus on instructionalism, the measurable objective, direct instruction, forced response assessment, in education using the web leads to "delivering re-purposed content to students via the Internet. Communication, collaboration, community and construction are afterthoughts graded onto modern correspondence courses."

This data fetishization is a symptom of society rooted in the same problem that lead to the lack of ethics in computer science. Being inclusive doesn't exist on a Likert scale; it develops on a human scale

Therefore, rather than specific learner objectives, we will work with participants to set their "subjectives" (Cormier, 2015) and let them determine the goals in a class that is

·       Collaborative – everyone, including the instructor, learns together and takes responsibility for everyone else’s learning.

·       Documented - the processes of learning are more important that the specifics of the knowledge constructed. The learning process, therefore, is documented in the...

·       Open - by exposing learning to colleagues and the public, students take the first steps in taking control of their digital identity and expanding their horizons as connected learners-John Becker, 2016.

Community we create will teach more about ethics than specific content. By utilizing case studies, we can connect with multiple perspectives and allow for growth and self-remediation yet we must live these lessons to the spaces and tools we build.

 

 

Measuring Success:

 

Measuring Success

Space as Variable of Interest

As our focus is more on measuring success in our spaces of learning, we will ask learners to plot how they feel the class supports learners in growing on the following scales:

  • Lead
    • Learn
    • Teach
    • Innovate
    • Evangelize
    • Organize
  • Communicate
    • Inquiry
    • Identify
    • Position
    • Empathize
    • Engage
  • Think
    • Question
    • Reflect
    • Analyze
    • Decide
    • Change
  • Create
    • Build
    • Test
    • Iterate
    • Differentiate
    • Scale

 

We will  will create a simple web app for participants to record not where they feel the majority of students engage with the participatory learning environments. After each class students, will simply click on across each of the four scales. We will use this data to iterate on how we meet our pedagogical goals.

Curating Evidence of Success

Each week all participants will be asked to select a picture and write a brief not explaining how the picture captures how they feel. Using content analysis and semiotic analysis we will explore the visual metaphors participants choose. This will provide evidence of knowledge growth from participants. This task is also designed to reinforce visual thinking in the creation of case studies.

Parsing for Growth

Because A-Frame is written in declarative HTML, we will be able to track knowledge growth by using HTML parsers and a type of metadata called microformats. These will be included in both the case study templates, student blogs, and the A-Frame starter kits.

We will also be able to track the number of changes students make using the history available to us in both Git and Glitch.

Webmention badges

We will also create a platform to issue badges. These have been piloted and successfully deployed. All class instructional pages will accept webmentions. Students will apply for a badge by writing a post in reply to the course explaining how they met criteria. If they met the criteria a webmention badge will be sent in reply to the application and to the student’s badge display page.

Circuit of Reflective Inquiry

Ethics requires a study of self and society through a process of self-remediation and democratic education. As we try to measure success of these efforts in Computer Science, we attempt to use multiple pieces of evidence that still put agency in the learner to focus on their subjectives. In this approach we hope to measure growth through Gee's circuit of reflective action:

We formulate a goal (and the goal could be answering a question) and then we take an action in the world. We see how the world responds to the action, ask ourselves whether this response was good or not for the accomplishment of our goal, and then, if need be, act again on better information or a redefined goal. The circuit of reflective action is an interactive conversation with the world.

Greg McVerry

Tracing Pathways of Perspective and Broken Promises #LRA18

Perspective. Too often it's just the 250 words you can allot before describing yoru study, or worse the views of someone paying your tuition bills. Yet

5 min read

Perspective. Too often it's just the 250 words you can allot before describing yoru study, or worse the views of someone paying your tuition bills.

Yet when we think of design and building off of theory much of thw world is trying to replicate what we once meant by having a theoretical perspective drive your design.

I have tried to reclaim this aspect of my research over the past year.

Teacher Education Research Study Group

I had originally planned on working with the TERSG study group on work on culturally proactive pedagogy. Joy Meyers, Carin Appleget, Courtney Hokulaniokekai Shimek, Breanya Hogue. Awesome people I had let down.

Last year at LRA it was my first time trying not running a study group in five years. It felt liberating. Actaully it was my first year not being a section program chair or e-editor in in three years.

I looked forward to trying something new. The Teacher Education Research Study Group soudned great.I walked in not knowing a thing and I loved their design. Each year they nrainstorm a study , compelte study and present the next year. Rinse, wash, repeat. Brilliant.

I also thought trying to move my research into teacher ed would help me survive life at a comprehensive university. A 4-4 load, with three credits release for being graduate coordinator, and trying to organize an research agenda...I thought basing my research in my day to day of teacher prep  would help me breath.

The pressures on faculty are immense. We handle 30 applicants a semester. Advise 30-40 students a semseter. Hit enrollment targets, develop a plan and set targets for minority teacher recruitment. Collect data for CAEP, figure out the EdTPA roll-out, interview perspective students, sit on graduate council....who am I telling you know the story...

I loved the work we did with Teacher Education Research Study Group. We designed a series of lessons around culturally proactive pedagogy in our methods classes. Worked on iterating on design, reflecting on our own bias. Solid good work the it's meant to be.

I did some of my best teaching that semester. I wanted to model proactive. As an online class discovered new ways to track patterns that provided wonderful insight. Maybe even get a metholdogy paper out of this as well! After the semester I went to pick up the IRB forms dropped off to the office.

One student completed the form.

I had nothing. All the work, for naught. Which then makes you feel guilty for trying to make professional gains doing something that is so fundementally right.

I tried to stick with the group. I had made new friends. Slowly the pressures of the campus and a loss of perspective and I faded away. Letting my team down.

The research never truly drove me. I loved the search for new methods for data analysis of online classes but diversity in children's literature just wasn't my passion. Which also leads to guilt. Here I want to talk tech and students face a world of hate and opression.

I needed a new plan.

Perspective Possibilities

At my plan crumbled I was also making no secret that I think most of the education research, publication, and assessment industry is a sham at worse and a waste of resources as best.

I have always tried to advocate for greater open scholarship. Pushed hard. Got bruised harder and made no gains.

It's called power for a reason.

So I started searching and playing in open spaces. I have always fooled with tech. Never really a coder or developer, a tinkerer.Part of the reason I studied at the New Literacies Research Lab. I believe the way we read, write, and participate has fundementaly shifted and we as educators faield to respond.

Given my affinity for hanging online and my desire for open scholarship I was drawn to the IndieWeb community. In fact my first IndieWeb post came at LRA when I argued against the rights  we sign away to publishers.

So I chose to switch gears and continue the work I began last year when I presented a study on and Rhizomatic Learning.

Philosophies of Your Own Domain

Something different happens in  spaces people own online. The agentive writing, the continuos exchange of knowledge, and the struggle to understand all unfold as people fold their identities.

I began by trying to draw on Vygotsky's idea of perezhivaniya.After designing a research project around this philsophy I shared the work with the Extrended Mind Culture and Activity ListServ.

They pointed me towards Dewey. I missed the the "essence" that often will not translate to English. I have always been drwn to Dewey. Especially after long conversations with Chip Bruce and Rick Beach. So I tweaked my design around theories of democracy and education.

I ended up here in the paper: https://jgmac1106homepage.glitch.me/openpedagogycasestudy.html#power-platforms-and-individuals

Yet this makes me think about perspectives and international literacy research. Is Dewey, his pragmatism, as American as Apple Pie and frought with same cultural bias? Can you build toward an ideal without a focus on the critical?

These will be thoughts I will continue to explore. Well it's after midnight. Missing everyone at but Skip James been keeping me company. Enough rambling. Gonna call it a night. Enjoy vital sessions.

 

Greg McVerry

Engaging in Discourse About Your Work

I have searched high and low for the magic sauce. I haven't found it yet. I want the ingredient that makes community flourish in the

7 min read

I have searched high and low for the magic sauce. I haven't found it yet. I want the ingredient that makes community flourish in the online classes I teach.

I blamed the LMS. Studnets just worked through assignments and if you said post and respond twice. That is exactly what they did.

I realized it is in't the LMS that suck it was me.

I tried every configuration of tools to try and crowbar "social" in. No matter the format my class ended up looking like a pinterest board of student assignments. I could have just taught via email.

I realized what my students were missing was a model of federated and distributed discourse. In the class I give no minimums of how many posts and how many replies. It seems contrite. So this iteration I have told my students I expect interaction. They simply will not do well if they just post their completed assignments. Engagement is required...but I did not provide support.

That is the purpose of this post. Look at how social media engagement occurs in the wild

In the tweets below you will find the conversation threads surrounding this post.

Here are my tips to engage with others:

  • Be proud of what you write and make
  • Share it out across networks. It is okay to share posts beyond class
  • Invite discussion (But don't end posts with "What do you think? Just leave a comment." That's cheesy)
  • Share more than a link. Tell my why your post is important. Why should I care.
  • Pictures included with social media increase engagement.

You want to not simply post your work but live it. Have an emotional attachment to your ideas and your words. Discuss what you write and watch it travel.

I then pinged people in my network I knew who would be either interested or willing to challenge my ideas. Hopefully both.

Some left comments on the blog.

Then some folks really wanted us to annotate the piece.

This brought in the interest of the Hypothesis Team

Some people then shared their own work to back up their claims or challenge my claims.

We discussed research and assessment methods

We debated the boundaries of action, thought, knowledge, and assessment.

We kicked people off the boat

CLMOOC

Prev | Home | Join | ? | Next