Walden University--EDUC 6713--Week 4 Application

To provide a recap for myself as well as my readers; the goals I have selected for my GAME plan fall under two primary categories.  The first category is the encouragement of learner reflection and the second category is to engage in professional development while also encouraging and motivating other individuals to grow in the area of technology integration.  While both of these categories seem applicable and meaningful by themselves, I believe that by combing my learning from each I will increase my effectiveness and understanding to an even greater level. 

So far, I have found both of these categories to be well-worth my investigation time.  If I had to place myself on a progress timeline I would place myself deep within the Action stage.  However, it seems that the stages within the GAME plan seem to overlap and merge with each other.  In other words, my progress within the Action stage has led me into the Monitoring stage as well.  In fact, as I acquire new information I am constantly reflecting on how that learning relates to my current context and future. 

Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009) emphasize the crucial importance of monitoring your learning, as this is a crucial component in successful self-directed learning.  The primary tool I have used during this stage is a reflection journal.  I do not have a tablet and handheld digital device; therefore, much of my monitoring and reflection can be found within the pages of regular paper notebook.  However, if I had such a device I think it may help me to organize my learning more effectively.  Plus, I could use a recordable device in order to verbalize my own thoughts or the thoughts of other interested individuals.    

            Within my notebook you will find information on both goals.  I have talked with fellow educators and have received some fairly sound advice.  In regards to student reflection the favorite idea I have come across is to have a “Wrap it up!” session at the end of each lesson.  These sessions could help my students to evaluate their own understanding in regards to a number of standards and goals required within my district Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum documents (Laramie County School District 1, 2011). 

During this time students take a quick 5 minutes to write down their thoughts about the learning.  This is also their time to write down any questions they may have in regards to the content.  From this point the teacher can select from a variety of sharing options; there can be a class sharing session, a peer/small group sharing session, or the teacher can simply take their writing and read it at a later time.  This reflection can also be considered a form of student self-assessment, which is a critical stepping stone towards self-initiated learning (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010).

            On the other hand, I was recently given the opportunity to work on encouraging and motivating other individuals to grow in the area of technology.  This opportunity has come to me in the form of a student teacher with whom I will be working with next fall.  Yes, I know this is only one person with whom I can potentially influence, but it is a good start.  Therefore, from here I think I need to modify my action plan to reflect the needs of a new teacher in regards to technology integration.  Not only do I plan on using the content and learning I am able to attain via my own education, but I also plan to expand upon this content and create a repertoire of knowledge that can be shared with my mentee. 

            Finally, the main question that has arisen from my learning thus far is, “How do I know when I have enough information?”  It seems to me that there is so much to learn in regards to both of my goals.  I am having a hard time deciding on a stopping point.  I guess the key aspect to remember is not to overwhelm myself and provide myself with time to not just graze the surface for a vast amount of information, but to dive deep into a few selected resources that can really help me to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation for the knowledge acquired within the attainment of both of my goals. 

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Laramie County School District 1.  (2011).  Grade kindergarten GVC 2011-2012.  Retrieved from http://gvc.www.laramie1.org/modules/locker/files/group_files.phtml?gid=1749089&parent=13847822&sessionid=b91b3fad577d9b89464d37148bb3ec21

Laureate Education, Inc.  (Executive Producer). (2010).  Program three. Assessing student learning [Webcast]. Integrating technology across the content areas.   Baltimore, MD: Author.

Walden University--EDUC 6713--Week 3 Application

After reviewing my GAME plan it seems that my goals fall under to two broad categories; the first category being the encouragement of learner reflection and the second category being my own ability to engage in professional development while also encouraging and motivating other individuals to grow in the area of technology integration.  While both of these categories are different they actually will require many of the same resources.

In order to encourage student reflection I will need to use technology to research alternative methods for engaging even young students as they attempt to reflect upon their learning.  I will need access to a variety of forms of informative material, such as digital or even printed resources.  I may also need to interact with other colleagues who have successfully implemented this reflection within their own classroom.  Finally, I could attempt to receive expert opinions from college professors within my area or accessibly via the Internet.  Furthermore, there may also be professional readings which I could check out from our local library or buy from our local bookstore that will assist me in my venture to identify with successful means for using student reflection within the classroom.

Similar to the student reflection goal, I believe that the professional development goal will also require outside resources.  I will need to check with our local college in order to identify experts within the realm of technology integration.  Hopefully, I will be able to set up a time to chat with these individuals or at least exchange emails with them.  Furthermore, I will need to access credible material provided by professional organizations.  This could be done via the Internet or professional publications.  Finally, I may also be able to find information from other teachers within my district who can provide me with technology integration tips that work well within the context of our personal educational settings.

Therefore, the additional information that I will need in order to further my GAME plan will be centered on retrieving and identifying resources which may be critical to my growth within each goal.  As of right now I believe that I am still within the Action step of my GAME plan.  The next step will be for me to monitor my learning as I attempt to implement some of the information I retrieve during my research.  This monitoring will be a crucial step in my self-directed learning as it will require me to constantly reflect on my learning and how it relates to my current context and future (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009).  During this time I plan on using a reflective journal to document my thoughts, observations, and ideas.  Finally, I will need to evaluate the meaning of the learning and how it directly relates to my professional and personal environment.  Furthermore, this step will allow me to identify where I am at as a professional and where I want to go!   

References

 Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

               

Walden University--EDUC 6713--Week 2 Application

Week Two Application— Developing Your Personal GAME Plan

Developing a GAME plan is an essential step towards pursuing my own personal need to become an effective and efficient self-directed learner.  While learning how to use technology is generally a self-directed task; an appropriately designed and purposely implemented GAME plan can help increase the amount of learning that can ensue from that task.  Furthermore, this plan encourages the learner to take on the role of being a metacognitive thinker and apply their learning to the context.  In fact, the components of the GAME plan align almost perfectly with the mindset of metacognitive learner as they think about their own thinking and process the implications of their own ideas and thoughts.

            The first step in the GAME plan is to set goals for learning (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009).  In the case I have decided to set my own personal goals that will help me to increase my awareness and capabilities to meet the National Education Standards for Teachers which have been determined by the International Society for Technology in Education (2008).  These standards and indicators have been created to help educators to engage students and improve learning by enriching their professional practice and the learning environments of their students.  All of these standards personally hold much potential to strengthen my professional traits.  However, there are some in which I feel more comfortable and some in which I feel the need for personal growth.

            The indicators in which I have decided to focus on for the developments of my GAME plan fall under two different standards.  The first falls under the standard of facilitating and inspiring student learning and creativity.  The following indicator encourages the teacher to promote student reflection using collaborative tools to reveal and clarify students’ conceptual understanding and thinking, planning, and creative processes (International Society for Technology in Education, 2008).  Student reflection is not something I find myself pushing for too often at the Kindergarten level.  However, I think I forget that even at a young age children are still capable of reflecting upon their own learning.  This reflection may need to be modified to meet the capacity and extent to which a younger student can complete this process.  Therefore, my first goal is to determine how technology can help me to provide meaningful reflection time for my young learners.  Furthermore, I would like to indentify the correlation between this reflection and the content standards in which I must focus upon within the guaranteed and viable curriculum of my district (Laramie County School District 1, 2011).

            The second indicator which I have decided to focus on within my GAME plan falls under the standard of engaging in my own professional growth and leadership (ISTE, 2008).  I decided to focus upon this goal due to the difficulty I have had in the past with fellow educators who just seem so stuck in their own ways with little to no willingness to change and be open to new and different possibilities.  While I wish to be a leader within my profession and pave the path for others, this job is definitely easier said than done.  However, by focusing on the following indicator within my GAME plan I am hopeful that I will be able to ease this difficulty.  The following indicator prompts the educator to contribute to the effectiveness, vitality, and self-renewal of the teaching profession and of their school and community.  Therefore, my second goal is to identify means for encouraging and promoting the growth of others as well as myself within the area of technology integration within the classroom.  More specifically, I am hopeful that I will be able to make others take note of what kind of learning is possible when you successfully include digital tools and resources within your classroom.

            The next step in the GAME plan is to plan a course of action that I will follow in order to meet these goals.  During this step of the plan it is essential to locate information by using a variety of methods (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009).  My first and most obvious source of information to achieve these goals will come from the time I spend interacting with my fellow classmates within this course.  My blog will provide me with a means for this communication.  However, I also plan on using outside resources, such as searching the web and looking for professional websites that may provide me with authentic information on this topic.  There may also be experts which I can locate and email in order to receive additional feedback on the topic.  Finally, I plan on talking with my colleagues and fellow teachers within my district.  I will meet with my instructional facilitator and ask for her insight as well as other teachers who may seem to have already effectively implemented technology within their own classroom.   

            While I am taking action I will also begin the next step in the GAME plan.  As I collect information I will also simultaneously monitor my learning.  Sample questions I may ask myself during the monitoring stage are provided by Cennamo, Ross, and Ertmer (2009); “Is my plan working?  Am I finding the information I need?  If I am unable to answer yes to either of these questions, then I may need to redesign or construct my mode for collecting information.  In fact, during this stage I must constantly reflect on my learning and how that learning relates to my current context and future.  During this time I plan on keeping a journal to organize my thoughts and learning as well as a concrete area for self-reflection.

            Finally, this self-reflection will lead me into the final stage of the GAME plan, evaluating my learning (Cennamo, Ross, & Ertmer, 2009).  If I have not successfully met my goals I will obviously need to restructure my plan and attempt a different plan of attack.  However, if I have met my goals or partially met my goals, then I will need to formulate a plan to extend my learning.  In other words, I will need to apply my learning within the context of my personal situation and circumstances.  Furthermore, I will need to plan for the extension of this learning into my future professional actions.  In fact, having this knowledge in the future is an aspect that many successful teachers posses as they integrate these digital tools within their own classrooms (Laureate Education, Inc., 2010).   Finally, it is essential to share my learning with others in hopes of not only helping myself, but also others who are interested in the application of technology within their own classroom.

References

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach. (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National education standards for teachers (NETS-T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx

Laramie County School District 1.  (2011).  Grade kindergarten GVC 2011-2012.  Retrieved from http://gvc.www.laramie1.org/modules/locker/files/group_files.phtml?gid=1749089&parent=13847822&sessionid=b91b3fad577d9b89464d37148bb3ec21

Laureate Education, Inc.  (Executive Producer). (2010).  Program three.  Enriching content area learning experiences with technology [Webcast]. Integrating technology across the content areas.   Baltimore, MD: Author.

Walden University—EDUC 6711 Final Blog Reflection—Personal Theory of Learning and Future Implications

This course has helped me to mesh the use of educational technologies with theories of learning; it has allowed me to discover not only the importance of technology, but also the importance of creating opportunities which support the conjunction of technology and current learning theories in order to differentiate student instruction.  After reviewing my “Personal Theory of Learning” and reflecting upon my own learning from this course I have been reaffirmed on the importance of using not only one learning theory, instructional strategy, or form of technology (Schwartz, 2011).  In other words, students are very different and bring a great array of learning styles; therefore, as a teacher I must be prepared to provide opportunities which supply a variety of forms to acquire new knowledge.

I still believe I use the behaviorist, cognitivist, and at times the constructivist approach to learning.  Each theory provides a different perspective.  In fact, each theory uses different entities to engage the learner, but all seem to encourage active learning (Laureate, 2011).  While one theory may work well for one child, that same theory may not be the best option for another.  Furthermore, while one theory may work well for one content area, that same theory may not work well in another content area.  Therefore, it is important for the teacher to remain flexible.  While most educators have a tendency to teach in accordance to their own preferred learning style, it is important to take the time to evaluate the effectiveness of that style in conjunction with you current student population and the differences they may bring to the table.

Therefore, as an educator I plan on using this advice in my own practice.  For example, the social learning theory has never been one of my personal favorites.  In other words, it is difficult for me to learn using this theory.  Unpleasant and ineffective learning opportunities that were centered on this theory have left a bad taste in my mouth as a learner.  Therefore, as a teacher I tend to avoid this theory within my own practice.  However, this course has helped me to see the value of this theory in relation to some of my learners.  In fact, this theory even supports the gradual release of responsibility that I hold of value within my own classroom.  In other words, this theory can provide this gradual release through social interactions and active engagement (Orey, 2001).  Therefore, I plan on beginning to incorporate this theory on a more routine basis within my classroom.

Furthermore, technology can assist me in the development of this active engagement and social interaction within my classroom.  I definitely plan on using voice thread applications more often.  The two I have used over the duration of this course were a definite hit with my learners.  Not only were they a captivating form for providing information, but they also allowed my learners to interact with the information and provide their own input via comments.  This in turn provided my students with a sense of ownership over the information and a development of pride in their own thoughts and input.

Another, technological tool which I can see myself implementing on a more routine basis would be the use of my interactive board for more than a simple instructional tool.  I want my interactive board to become just that, “interactive.”  In other words, I want my students to feel comfortable using the board to construct their own knowledge and develop further skills.  In turn, they will not only be acquiring academic skills in relation to the content, but they will also be acquiring 21^st century life skills as they learn to interact with their surroundings and use them to their advantage.  Consequently, as a teacher I believe I have developed a repertoire of instructional skills that will not only support the academic development of my learners, but also their development of life skills which they will be able to take with them and use even after they leave my room.

Therefore, setting two long-term goals seems like an effective means for assuring my future use of these new tools and others which will not only benefit my learners, but also my own instructional practice.  First of all, I would like to continue the use of technology tools as learning tools and not simply instructional tools.  In order to achieve this feat I will begin by logging and reflecting on my use of technology.  I will describe this use on a weekly basis, mark the effectiveness of each tool, and finally reflect on the benefits.  This will help me to determine the ability for each apparatus to be viewed as a learning tool or just an instructional tool.

Finally, I would like to continue to learn about more opportunities for using technology to enhance learning.  Prior to this course I had never experienced or used the voice thread apparatus.  Therefore, I am sure there are plenty of more apparatuses which I have yet to encounter that may enhance the learning in my classroom.  In order to achieve this goal I will continue my venture with Walden as well as taking the initiative to self-educate.  In other words, I plan on signing up for technology classes that may not be required, but are provided by my district.  Furthermore, I will inquire about seminars that may be provided with our local community college.  This institution may be able to provide me with ideas for using local technology tools, which are specific to my location and can be used within my classroom.  Ultimately, I plan on continuing with my current instructional technique, but modifying my use of technology and different instructional approaches in order to enhance all learning.  In other words, there is no need for me to reinvent the wheel; instead, I must simply remain flexible and willing to change in order to benefit my student population. 

References

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program three: Instructional theory vs. learning theory [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page

Schwartz, A. (2011).  EDUC 6711—Week One Application—Defining Your Personal Theory of Learning.  Unpublished manuscript, Walden University.

Week 5--VoiceThread--EDUC 6711--Walden University

During Week 5 of my EDUC6711 Walden University Course we were required to produce a VoiceThread.  The following is a link to the VoiceThread I created:  http://voicethread.com/share/2482114/.

EDUC 6711--Walden University--Week 5 Application--Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice

There are many strategies that can be implemented when attempting to use the constructivist approach.  The resources outlined this week focus on the ability to apply communication and socializing into this theory.  Social constructivism revolves around the gradual release of responsibility through social interactions (Orey, 2001).  This theory, while not as prevalent in the past is beginning to grow and become more and more used in classrooms around our nation.  Unfortunately, many educators are still weary of the change and continue to cling on to old practices which feel safe yet may not be as effective.

Personally, I am beginning to use social learning in my own classroom on a more regular and even typical basis.  Like many others I was afraid of allowing my learners to take control of their own learning.  Plus, when you add the social aspect of this theory into the picture the noise level is bound to increase.  However, with all the benefits which I have not only researched, but also observed it is hard not to succumb and at least begin this adventure into untraveled instructional techniques and I am more than happy that I have begun this journey.

Cooperative learning, a form of social learning (Laureate, 2011) is the main strategy I am currently trying to embark on within my classroom.  Letting go and allowing my Kindergarteners to become the social beings they were born to be has actually been a blessing in my classroom.  However, if I would have attempted this technique during my first year of teaching I don’t think I would have had the same results.  The combination of my own teaching experience and knowledge gained on this theory has allowed me to use this technique on a more consistent basis. 

My favorite strategy this year is the “Turn and Talk” method.  After encountering teachable moments within my room, I will allow a couple of my students to share with the whole class and discuss their thoughts in relation to the learning.   Obviously, there is not enough time in a day for the whole class to share after each moment (and if you have ever taught Kindergarten you would know that they are all eager share); therefore, I give all the students an opportunity to turn and talk to their neighbor about the current topic.  I found the main key to this strategy being effective in my room and tolerable in regards to noise level is to have them use whisper voice (obviously this take much practice and modeling at the beginning of the year).

While cooperative learning is becoming more and more prevalent within my classroom, there are still many social strategies that I have yet to embark upon within my own room.  Connectivism was a new theory to me.  However, this theory seems to make perfect sense in relation to our society this day and age.  Defined, this theory emphasizes the importance of acquiring information and knowledge which is directly important to the current context (Orey, 2001).  In other words, learners should be using their current situations to acquire the most up-to-date knowledge and content via making connection with others.  Unfortunately, this content is not always defined by standards and preset curriculum.  However, as an educator I can see the importance of this theory, but wish I had more support and knowledge regarding the use of such a powerful tool.  Until then I definitely plan on using some of my prior knowledge regarding social networking sites, wikis, and blogs to play off of this theory.    

Ultimately, social learning theories may begin to become more main stream in our classrooms around the nation, especially as technology and networking continue to grow.  Technology allows all individuals to connect and learn from each other on a easier basis.  With this said it seems essential for educators to present children with the opportunity to interact with these tools and develop social cooperation skills so that they may be better prepared for the future (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007).  Hopefully, our government will begin to also realize the importance of this trait in our learners and how it relates to standardized testing and educational accountability.  Until this is done it will be harder for educators to justify the importance of learning via social interactions within their classrooms and learning environments.

For all you visual learners, here is a link to a video in regards to the social learning theory:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-IJzoE4Xls.  It will also provide you with some more background and historical content in realtion to this theory which I have not discussed in my post.  Please feel free to also navigate into the other social learning videos which are also provided on this site.

Resources

Social Learning Theory [Video podcast].  (2011).  Retrieved from the YouTube   website:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-IJzoE4Xls

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program eight: Social learning theories [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

EDUC 6711--Walden University--Week 4 Application--Constructivism in Practice

There were several learning strategies provided by the resources this week which I found informative and valuable.  Many of these strategies meshed well with the constructivist learning philosophy.  This philosophy relies upon the indication that we all have our own unique base of knowledge which is created by on our own unique experiences (Laureate, 2011).  Therefore, the strategies presented this week were centered on the idea of having the learner construct an artifact, product, or design.  Accordingly, the learner would also be constructing knowledge; making assimilations, accommodations, and/or modifying their overall schema during this process.  Therefore, the learner is actively engaged in the learning process and responsible for a great deal of his or her own learning. 

Ultimately, this approach to learning seems extremely beneficial for a variety of learners.  There are many areas of intelligence or preferences which can be met when an educator decides to use this philosophy.  In fact the constructionism learning theory which is directly linked to this philosophy recognizes the importance of allowing learners to have immediate hands-on experiences with content.  These experiences are needed in order for the learner to thoroughly understand and make use of new knowledge.  In fact, this approach learning can provide a learner the opportunity to learn from to visual cues, social interactions, audio representation, and even self-inquiry.

Learning by design and project based learning are the first strategies that I will highlight in regards to their correlation with the constructivist learning philosophy.  Although these two strategies seem very similar, they are not exact replicas.  The main difference seems to be the end result.  During the learning by design strategy the learner is left with an actual artifact, but during the project base learning strategy the leaner may be left with a product, project, or simply an experience.  Furthermore, project based learning seems to encourage a sustained amount of cooperation over an extended amount of time (Orey, 2001). 

However, both of the strategies encourage constructionism as they allow the leaner to interact with the content, confront any misconceptions, and construct new meaningful knowledge.    Furthermore, the learners are provided with reflection time, which allows them to reactivate new knowledge and hopefully increase the retention rate for this learning (Orey, 2001).  Finally, both strategies seem to increase motivation as they are related to student interests and have the potential to create meaningful experiences.

Next, I evaluated the use of problem based learning in which leaners actively resolve complex problems in realistic situations (Orey, 2001).  It is extremely important that the student takes ownership of the problem.  In other words, if you provide the learner with a problem which is completely irrelevant to their life, then the actual learning will probably not be as powerful.  Finally, the student is allowed to find a solution and create evidence which supports their finding.  The nice thing about this is that the student is able to take any avenue as long as the can support their finding.  In other words, there is more than one answer. 

In fact, the problem based learning theory fits well with the idea of student generating and testing their own hypotheses.  In other words, creating a hypothesis does not have to be solely for science experiments (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007); it can actually be linked into any part of the curriculum given the correct framework.  For example, students can actively find solutions to a variety of topics in a variety of contents, including math, social studies, health, and even current events.  Accordingly, problem based learning is structured around the construction of data to resolve or make sense out of a meaningful investigation.

Ultimately, I believe the most important aspect of constructionism to remember is that learner is to actively construct knowledge in their mind.  This is not intended to be a passive process in which the knowledge is simply transmitted from teacher to student (Orey, 2001).  Instead, the student receives knowledge by physically creating their own artifact.  This artifact and the process can then be reflected upon by the learner at a later date.  In my mind, this part of the process seems to provide the most meaningful portion of the learning.  Not only is the learner actively constructing their own knowledge during the creation process, but they are also left with a physical creation or experience which can be used to reflect upon and activate the new learning at a later date.

The following is a link to a video which provides an example of the differences between a traditional classroom and a constructivist classroom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEsGHVdVkMw&feature=related.  While this video is a little extreme I still believe it did a good job of emphasizing the redundancy and ineffective strategies which can be common in many traditional classrooms.   Please enjoy, I know I did!      

Resources

Contructivist vs. Traditional Classroom [Video podcast].  (2011).  Retrieved from the YouTube website:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEsGHVdVkMw&feature=related

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2011). Program seven: Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [Video webcast]. Bridging learning theory, instruction and technology. Retrieved from http://laureate.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5700267&CPURL=laureate.ecollege.com&Survey=1&47=2594577&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=0&bhcp=1

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2001). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Main_Page

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.