SemesterFall Semester, 2020
DepartmentMaster’s Program in Teaching Chinese as a Second Language, First Year Master’s Program in Teaching Chinese as a Second Language, Second Year
Course NameStudy of Knowledge Creation and Educational Technology
InstructorHONG HUANG-YAO
Credit3.0
Course TypeElective
Prerequisite
Course Objective
Course Description
Course Schedule






















































































































Week

Topic & Reading Materials

Activities & Class Assignments/Tasks

Students Involved Time



（Include Teaching Hours）

1

Introduction & Workshop: Knowledge building technology




  1. Syllabus.

  2. KF Manual: see at http://www.knowledgeforum.com/Kforum/products.htm(This class will be a hands-on workshop: learning how to use Knowledge Forum--knowledge-building software)

Activities:




  1. Technology overview

  2. Learning Knowledge Forum software

  3. Self-introduction



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 2 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

2

Knowledge Societies and the role of technology




  1. Trilling, B., & Hood, P. (1999). Learning technology and education reform in the knowledge age or "We're wired, webbed and windowed, now what?" Educational Technology, 39(3), 5-18.

Activities:




  1. Watching TED video: How technology evolves (http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_kelly_on_



how_technology_evolves)




  1. Let students share their ideas derived from viewing TED video content

  2. Let students work collaboratively – analyze the content from assigned reading material (e.g., the 7Cs)

  3. Summarizing all contents organized by students

  4. Exploring the concept of lifelong kindergarten at MIT Media lab



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 3 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum

  2. Watching a TED video: The era of open innovation (http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_leadbeater



_on_innovation)



 

 



 



3+5

3

Knowledge-creating school




  1. Hargreaves, D. H. (1999). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47(2), 122-144.

Activities:




  1. Posting questions and letting student think about what a knowledge creating school is about

  2. Let students share their ideas about “traditional schools” and “knowledge creating schools”, then write it on whiteboard and share their thought with others

  3. Introduce Web 1.0, Web 2.0, & Web 3D

  4. Explore khanacademy (https://www.khanacademy.org)

  5. Let students share their experience in khanacademy website and try to analyze its strength and limitation



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 4 paper and post at least one question or reflection note in Knowledge Forum

  2. Watching a TED video: Do schools kill creativity (http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_



says_schools_kill_creativity)



 

 



 



3+5

4

Learning community




  1. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-118).

Activities:




  1. Posting questions and letting student think about knowledge building in school context

  2. Let students work collaboratively to clarify what knowledge building is

  3. Organizing all content shared by students and provide a brief conclusion on the contents

  4. Introduce technologies to support effective networking (e.g., MySpace & Social Bookmarking)



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 5 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

5

Knowledge-building pedagogy and tech




  1. Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., & Zhang, J. (2010). Knowledge Society Network: Toward a dynamic, sustained network for building knowledge. Canadian Journal of Learning And Technology / La Revue Canadienne De L’Apprentissage Et De La Technologie, 36(1).

Activities:




  1. Watching a TED video: Kids can teach themselves (http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_



shows_how_kids_teach_themselves)




  1. Let students reflect by themselves about the content from TED video watched

  2. Let students define the concept of “learning”, then share it in Knowledge Forum

  3. Learning Knowledge Forum analytical tools



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 6 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

6

Technology in support of community building




  1. Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-20.

Activities:




  1. Posting question and let student think about what kinds of technologies can be supported in community’s - knowledge building activities

  2. Let students share technologies or websites that are used before and post comments in Knowledge Forum

  3. Students try to explore technologies or websites suggested by others and leave comments online

  4. Introduce ubiquitous learning via mobile devices (e.g., iPhone.)



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 7 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

7

Teaching for creativity




  1. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.

Activities:




  1. Posting questions and letting student think about what creative teaching is

  2. Let students generate their ideas of creative teaching and post them in Knowledge Forum

  3. Each student tries to provide comments that build on others’ ideas

  4. Introduce technologies to support creative teaching (e.g, MOOCs)

  5. Let students share their experience in WebCT and try to analyze its strengths and limitations



Tasks:




  1. Prepare midterm project presentation



 

 



 



3+5

8

Midterm 1

Activities:




  1. Midterm paper/project presentation #1

  2. Introduce technologies to support creative learning (e.g., Scratch at MIT Media Lab)

  3. Let students share their experience in Scratch and try to analyze its strengths and limitations



Task:




  1. Prepare midterm project presentation

  2. Upload presentation materials to Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

9

Midterm 2

Activities:




  1. Midterm paper/project presentation #2

  2. Introduce Edu games

  3. Let students share their experience in Edu games and try to analyze its strengths and limitations



Tasks:




  1. Upload presentation materials to Knowledge Forum

  2. Reading Week 10 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum

  3. Watching a TED video: Where good ideas come from (https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_



johnson_where_good_ideas_come_from)



 

 



 



3+5

10

Ideas as conceptual objects (midterm report 1)




  1. Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, Socioculturalism, and Popper's World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21-23.

Activities:




  1. Posting question and letting student think about “ideas as conceptual objects”

  2. Let students generate their thought and post them in Knowledge Forum

  3. Each student tries to provide comments that build on others’ ideas

  4. Introduce technologies to support collaboration (e.g., Wiki & Google Documents)



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 11 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum

  2. Watching a TED video: When ideas have sex (https://www.ted.com/talks/ matt_ridley_



when_ideas_have_sex)



 

 



 



3+5

11

Improvable ideas (midterm report 2)




  1. Papert, S. (1991). "What's the Big Idea: Towards a Pedagogy of Idea Power." IBM Systems Journal 39(3-4).

Activities:




  1. Watching a TED video: Build a tower, build a team (https://www.ted.com/talks/ tom_wujec_



build_a_tower)




  1. Let students form small groups and discuss the contents of the viewed TED video and provide evidences supported by the reading materials

  2. Let students experience an Edu game : Animal Jam (http://www.animaljam.com/)

  3. Let students try to analyze an Edu game concerning its strengths and limitations



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 12 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum

  2. Watching a TED video: Bring on the learning revolution (https://www.ted.com/talks/ sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution)



 

 



 



3+5

12

Student agency




  1. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262-272). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

.Activities:




  1. Let students form small groups and discuss the concept of “routine expertise” and “adaptive expertise”

  2. Let students search a Youtube video that supported “routine expertise” or “adaptive expertise”

  3. Introduce technologies in support of idea improvement (e.g., SRI Scribble)

  4. Let students share their experience in Scribble and try to analyze its strengths and limitations



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 13 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

13

Design-based Knowledge building practice




  1. Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., Richard, M., & Teo, C. L. (2015). Fostering sustained knowledge building among elementary students through principle-guided use of analytical tools. Computers & Education, 89, 91-102.

Activities:




  1. Posting question and letting student think about design-based knowledge building

  2. Let students form small groups and work collaboratively in discussing design-based knowledge building

  3. Introduce video technologies in support of deep reflection (e.g., YouTube-UC Berkeley)

  4. Let students to explore Prodigy Math Game and try to analyze its strengths and limitations



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 14 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

14

Principle Practical Knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder




  1. Bereiter, C. (2014). Principle practical knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder. Journal of the Learning Science, 23(1) ,4-17.

Activities:




  1. Posting question and letting student think about principled practical knowledge

  2. Let students form small groups and work collaboratively in discussing principled practical knowledge

  3. Summarizing the core concept of principled practical knowledge



Tasks:




  1. Reading Week 15 paper and post at least one question or a reflection note in Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

15

Review: trend of learning tech. development




  1. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2010). The Second Educational Revolution: Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology. J. Comput. Assisted Learn. 26 ,18-27

Activities:




  1. Posting question and letting student think about the trend of learning technology development

  2. Let students generate their ideas and post them in Knowledge Forum

  3. Each student tries to provide comments that build on others’ ideas

  4. Exploring some web tools for self-directed learning.



Task:




  1. Prepare final project presentation



 

 



 



3+5

16

Final presentation 1

Activities:




  1. Final project presentation #1

  2. Learning in Virtual Worlds (e.g., 2nd Life, VR, and AR)



Tasks:




  1. Prepare final project presentation

  2. Upload presentation materials to Knowledge Forum



 

 



 



3+5

17

Final presentation 2

Activities:




  1. Final project presentation #2



Tasks:




  1. Upload presentation materials to Knowledge Forum

  2. Working on individual final report



 

 



 



3+5

18

Final report

Task:




  1. Hand in final report



 

3+5

Teaching Methods
Teaching Assistant
Requirement/Grading








Rubric















































Criteria

Overall Content Quality



30%

Overall Source Quality



30%

Organization



10%

Visual Clarity & Appeal



Pictures/Graphic



15%

Presentation Skill



15%

Exceed expectation



(A) 10~9

This paper takes a clear position supported logically by extensive, concrete detail and critical interaction with source material.



All key points are thoroughly addressed.



Material is clear, relevant, accurate and concise.

Sources are clearly integrated into and advance the argument through accurate use of quotation, paraphrase or summary.



The paper consistently and accurately uses appropriate documentation style.



Source material fits smoothly into the writer’s own text.

The organization is logical, paragraphs are unified, exceptionally coherent and contain effective topic sentences, and transitions are effective.



There is a clear and easy-to-follow sequence of ideas.



There is no unnecessary duplication of ideas or information.

The project has an excellent design, layout; it is neat and easy to understand the content.



Pictures and graphics are clear and relevant.

Speaks clearly and confidently.



Meaningfully connects to audience.



Uses inflections, pauses, and accentuation and word choices strategically.



Professional dress and appearance.

Meets standard



(B) 8~7

This paper takes a clear position supported by moderate but logical detail and critical interaction with source material.



All key points are addressed.



Material is clear, relevant and accurate, but may be lacking conciseness.

Sources are clearly related to and advance the argument through accurate and appropriate use of quotation, paraphrase or summary.



There is accurate use of appropriate documentation style.



Source material fits smoothly into the writer’s own text.



The organization is logical, paragraphs are unified, coherent and contain topic sentences, and transitions are effective.



There is an easy-to-follow sequence of ideas.



There is little unnecessary duplication of ideas or information.

The project has a nice design, layout; it is neat and easy to read.



Most pictures and graphics are clear and relevant.

Speaks clearly.



Connects to audience.



Uses inflections, pauses, accentuation and appropriate word choices.



Neat and appropriate appearance.

Near standard



(C) 6~5

This paper takes an apparent position supported by adequate detail and source material, some vagueness in example or relationship of sources to the argument or lapses in logic may be present.



Material is appropriate, but may lack a clear connection to the purpose.



There may be some irrelevant information.

Source material may be used non-critically.



Variety of sources is mostly limited and relies on quotation, paraphrase or summary.



There are occasional lapses in accurate documentation style but they do not interfere with the reader’s ability to check sources.

The organization is generally clear, transitions are clear but mechanical.



The sequence of ideas may be somewhat difficult to follow.



Some unnecessary duplication of ideas or information may be present.

The project needs improvement in design, layout and neatness.



Few of the pictures and graphics are clear and relevant.

Speaks somewhat clearly.



Has some connection with the audience.



Uses some inflections, pauses, accentuation but word choices are sometimes inaccurate or inappropriate.



Somewhat neat and appropriate appearance.

Below standard



(D) 4~3

In this paper, the position is confused, vague or uses illogical supporting details.



Little evidence of appropriate content.

Source material is misquoted, used out of context, poorly paraphrased, used non-critically, or has an unclear relationship to the argument.



Variety of sources is extremely limited and relies heavily on quotation, paraphrase or summary.



Inaccurate use of documentation style interferes with the reader’s ability to check sources.

The organization is unclear, paragraphs are incoherent or underdeveloped, and transitions are unclear or missing.



The sequence of ideas is difficult to follow.



Discussion branches off into topics that are not clearly related to the central question.

The project needs significant improvement in design, layout and neatness.



The student’s pictures are not clear or relevant.

Speaks with little clarity.



Has limited connection with the audience.



Uses little inflections, pauses, accentuation and work choice is frequently inaccurate or inappropriate.



Inappropriate or sloppy appearance.


 


Textbook & Reference

  1. Trilling, B., & Hood, P. (1999). Learning technology and education reform in the knowledge age or "We're wired, webbed and windowed, now what?" Educational Technology, 39(3), 5-18.

  2. Hargreaves, D. H. (1999). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47(2), 122-144.

  3. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-118).

  4. Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., & Zhang, J. (2010). Knowledge Society Network: Toward a dynamic, sustained network for building knowledge. Canadian Journal of Learning And Technology / La Revue Canadienne De L’Apprentissage Et De La Technologie, 36(1).

  5. Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-20.

  6. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.

  7. Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, Socioculturalism, and Popper's World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21-23.

  8. Papert, S. (1991). "What's the Big Idea: Towards a Pedagogy of Idea Power." IBM Systems Journal 39(3-4).

  9. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262-272). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

  10. Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., Richard, M., & Teo, C. L. (2015). Fostering sustained knowledge building among elementary students through principle-guided use of analytical tools. Computers & Education, 89, 91-102.

  11. Bereiter, C. (2014). Principle practical knowledge: Not a bridge but a ladder. Journal of the Learning Science, 23(1) ,4-17.

  12. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2010). The Second Educational Revolution: Rethinking Education in the Age of Technology. J. Comput. Assisted Learn. 26 ,18-27



 



Suggested further readings:




  1. Yang, Y., van Aalst, J., Chan, C. K. K., & Tian, W. (2016). Reflective assessment in knowledge building by students with low academic achievement. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 281-311. doi:10.1007/s11412-016-9239-1

  2. Popp, J. S., & Goldman, S. R. (2016). Knowledge building in teacher professional learning communities: Focus of meeting matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 347-359. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.06.007

  3. Hong, H. Y., & Chiu, C. H. (2016). Understanding how students perceive the role of ideas for their knowledge work in a knowledge-building environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 32-46.

  4. Hong, H. Y., Chen, B., & Chai, C. S. (2016). Exploring the development of college students' epistemic views during their knowledge building activities. Computers and Education, 98, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.005


Urls about Course
https://kf6.rit.albany.edu/login
Attachment