After reviewing the National Education Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T /2008) provided by the International Society for Technology in Education website I began to feel very confident that my GAME plan was directly in line with some of the standards. The GAME plan that I have created for myself coincides with my personal goals and my current teaching position. In investigating the standards I felt pretty confident that many of my short term and long term goals laid beneath the umbrella of the coverage of the standards.
The three standards that I found most of my goals to be related to were standards number 1, 3, and 4. Standard 1 describes an educators ability/intent to facilitate and inspire student learning. Standard 2 sets for objectives for educators to model digital-age work and learning. While Standard 3 focuses on the continual professional growth and development within educators, themselves. These three standards relate closely to my six goals listed below. With these goals intact I hope that I promote a digital-age classroom that prepares the 21st century learner for their future into the digital society that we all are becoming accompanied to.
GOALS:
1. I hope to promote creative and innovative thinking in my classroom by providing an atmosphere that motivates students with disabilities through the use of technology.
2. In the future I would like to teach a section of "life skills" to my students of special needs through the use of technology. (Example: Virtual Reality/Role Playing)
3. Being a special education teacher, I would like to continue to increase my parent to educator interaction by finding a way to communicate more efficiently through technology to report student progress.
4. I hope to increase the percent the rate of student success in the online credit recovery by the gaining of credits, in which, will cause an increase in our schools graduation percentage.
5. I hope to continue to explore, investigate, and communicate with my peers, colleagues, and mentors to find new strategies and methods through to use of technology to promote student success.
6. Complete the final requirements to gain a Master's in Integrating Technology into the Classroom.
Monitoring these goals should be easily done due to the fact they coincide with my personal goals and career goals already intact. Collecting data on graduation rates, successful gaining of credits for my students, observations of students and the work they accomplish, and tracking parent contact and involvement will all be items that will be included in the evaluation process.
How will I extend my learning? Well, one thing that I would like to continue to do, is sign up for as many professional development seminars, that my district offers. These seminars offered are usually free, innovative, and hands-on. Also, I hope to finish my Master's in Integrating Technology into the Classroom. Finally, I hope to continue to evaluate the data that is collected from my classroom, which is focused on technology, to adjust my teaching style to my student's learning style. Dr. Peggy Ertmer states it best that in order to enrich your content with technology you must be knowledgeable, confident, believe in yourself, and be supportive (Laureate 2009).
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). EDUC 6713I-1 Integrating Technology Across Content Areas. [DVD]. Enriching Content Area Learning Experiences with Technology Part II. Baltimore, MD. Dr. Peggy Ertmer
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Reflection of My Personal Theory of Learning
After a thorough last seven weeks I have discovered that I was not to far off when originally defining my personal theory on learning. Originally I stated that our classrooms, as educators, are filled with students who bring very diverse needs and learning styles into our classroom structure. These learning styles are shaped through the individuals personal and educational experiences. These experiences shape the way the student interacts, learns, and responds to instruction. Dr. Patricia Wolfe describes the sculpture of the brain is constructed through experience (Laureate 2009). This idea of experience sculpting the brain puts a true emphasis on the active learner that Dr. Orey has discussed throughout this course. We, as educators, have a true responsibility within the classroom to use instructional styles that touch, allow, and push all students in the classroom to achieve the high level of learning. This is only done with a balance of instructional strategies focusing on a "active" learner in the classroom.
Creating an "active" learner within the classroom, as I have discovered, is not the only piece of the puzzle when trying to create an effective classroom. Dr. Wolfe states that making the material of instruction meaningful and relatable to the students will increase the achievement of objectives in the classroom (Laureate 2009). With the continuous increase in technology in our classrooms and in the social life of our students an educator must utilize the resources around them. Two technology tools that I hope to incorporate into my classroom is the use of VoiceThread and concept mapping tools. Using VoiceThread within the classroom will allow my students to interactively comment and receive feedback on certain topics that we will explore in my special education behavior management lab. The use of concept mapping tools will allow me to structure new topics or units in the classroom. It will also provide a wonderful outline for guided notes that will allow my special education students to follow any topic while staying on task.
Overall I hope that my classroom, in the future, is guided by the active learner. I would like to rely less on power points, that I have constructed, to guide my lessons and more on my students creation of the power points and presentation to lead the classroom. I have a goal to limit myself to providing the structure and boundaries to projects and my students to the exploration and discovery of learning in the project. In short, I hope to decrease the traditional way of providing instruction to my students by increasing the use of technology in the classroom, through use of previous stated software, and create a more independent learner by allowing my students to experience learning.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Brain Research and Learning [Motion Picture]. [With Dr. Patricia Wolfe]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. United States:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Instructional Theory vs. Learning Theory [Motion Picture]. [With Dr. Michael Orey]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. United States:
Creating an "active" learner within the classroom, as I have discovered, is not the only piece of the puzzle when trying to create an effective classroom. Dr. Wolfe states that making the material of instruction meaningful and relatable to the students will increase the achievement of objectives in the classroom (Laureate 2009). With the continuous increase in technology in our classrooms and in the social life of our students an educator must utilize the resources around them. Two technology tools that I hope to incorporate into my classroom is the use of VoiceThread and concept mapping tools. Using VoiceThread within the classroom will allow my students to interactively comment and receive feedback on certain topics that we will explore in my special education behavior management lab. The use of concept mapping tools will allow me to structure new topics or units in the classroom. It will also provide a wonderful outline for guided notes that will allow my special education students to follow any topic while staying on task.
Overall I hope that my classroom, in the future, is guided by the active learner. I would like to rely less on power points, that I have constructed, to guide my lessons and more on my students creation of the power points and presentation to lead the classroom. I have a goal to limit myself to providing the structure and boundaries to projects and my students to the exploration and discovery of learning in the project. In short, I hope to decrease the traditional way of providing instruction to my students by increasing the use of technology in the classroom, through use of previous stated software, and create a more independent learner by allowing my students to experience learning.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Brain Research and Learning [Motion Picture]. [With Dr. Patricia Wolfe]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. United States:
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Instructional Theory vs. Learning Theory [Motion Picture]. [With Dr. Michael Orey]. Bridging Learning Theory, Instruction, and Technology. United States:
Sunday, August 1, 2010
VoiceThread URL
Here is the VoiceThread URL:
http://voicethread.com/share/1261769/
Please view and add any comments you would like.
Ty
http://voicethread.com/share/1261769/
Please view and add any comments you would like.
Ty
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
Connectivism and Social Learning in Practice
With the vast improving technologies in the classroom there is no question that social learning, collaborative learning, and connectivism go hand in hand. The classroom these days seem to be constructed of allowing students to derive to their own conclusions by independent completion of tasks. Allowing students to cooperate together in some manageable group allows, not only the educator to deliver more direct instruction, but also develops multiple life skill traits and content knowledge at the same time of interaction for students. As an educator’s main goal is to prepare students for future success in the real world, cooperative learning strategies help prepare students for the fast-paced, virtual workplace that they will encounter (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007).
The instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources can be directly beneficial in the proper structure of this style of learning within the classroom. Technology can play a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by giving structure to groups and allowing students to communicate without being face to face (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). In my special education classroom I tend to use cooperative learning quite often, but it is more in the traditional way rather than what I have discovered through this week’s learning resources. My classroom has used such multimedia tools to complete research for projects, development of power points, and organization of rubrics or group responsibilities. One collaborative project, using multimedia tools that I would like to complete in my classroom is the creating of a video. I understand that the preparation, up-front, has to be adequate. I believe that allowing my special education students to use visual displays and their own verbal input in the video, instead of written input, to direct the task would allow them to be more accommodated. This type of social learning project would not only develop responsibility skills within the group but also develop leadership skills, keep an active learner, and improve interpersonal skills.
The final collaborative technological tool that I would like to incorporate into my classroom that directly relates to the social learning theory is the use of key pals. Keypals is a way, similar to e-mail, for students to communicate in other cities, states and even countries (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Many of students would benefit from this strategy of learning due to the fact that it would broaden the perspective of others and challenge them to learn (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). I believe that this style of project would be one that would motivate my special education students to push themselves to learn. It also would hide some of their physical disabilities, that some other students cannot get past, to create a more comfortable atmosphere. This strategy allows the cooperating students to not only develop proper internet communication skills but also learn content in a different way or style from a distant student trying to achieve the same objective.
Overall technology can be adapted in many ways to fit into the collaborative, social style of learning. This style of learning seems to be the most needed during this day in age where employees are expected to be able to work cooperatively, even if they never see there peers face to face. Educators are responsible for developing this “etiquette” in our students so their future has the opportunity to become successful.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
With the vast improving technologies in the classroom there is no question that social learning, collaborative learning, and connectivism go hand in hand. The classroom these days seem to be constructed of allowing students to derive to their own conclusions by independent completion of tasks. Allowing students to cooperate together in some manageable group allows, not only the educator to deliver more direct instruction, but also develops multiple life skill traits and content knowledge at the same time of interaction for students. As an educator’s main goal is to prepare students for future success in the real world, cooperative learning strategies help prepare students for the fast-paced, virtual workplace that they will encounter (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007).
The instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources can be directly beneficial in the proper structure of this style of learning within the classroom. Technology can play a unique and vital role in cooperative learning by giving structure to groups and allowing students to communicate without being face to face (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). In my special education classroom I tend to use cooperative learning quite often, but it is more in the traditional way rather than what I have discovered through this week’s learning resources. My classroom has used such multimedia tools to complete research for projects, development of power points, and organization of rubrics or group responsibilities. One collaborative project, using multimedia tools that I would like to complete in my classroom is the creating of a video. I understand that the preparation, up-front, has to be adequate. I believe that allowing my special education students to use visual displays and their own verbal input in the video, instead of written input, to direct the task would allow them to be more accommodated. This type of social learning project would not only develop responsibility skills within the group but also develop leadership skills, keep an active learner, and improve interpersonal skills.
The final collaborative technological tool that I would like to incorporate into my classroom that directly relates to the social learning theory is the use of key pals. Keypals is a way, similar to e-mail, for students to communicate in other cities, states and even countries (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Many of students would benefit from this strategy of learning due to the fact that it would broaden the perspective of others and challenge them to learn (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). I believe that this style of project would be one that would motivate my special education students to push themselves to learn. It also would hide some of their physical disabilities, that some other students cannot get past, to create a more comfortable atmosphere. This strategy allows the cooperating students to not only develop proper internet communication skills but also learn content in a different way or style from a distant student trying to achieve the same objective.
Overall technology can be adapted in many ways to fit into the collaborative, social style of learning. This style of learning seems to be the most needed during this day in age where employees are expected to be able to work cooperatively, even if they never see there peers face to face. Educators are responsible for developing this “etiquette” in our students so their future has the opportunity to become successful.
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Constructivism in Practice
Blog Post: Constructivism in Practice
The key component to constructionism/constructivism is an actively engaged learner. This approach to learning focuses solely on the individual learner building their own meaning on an individual topic (Laureate 2009). With the strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources I have drawn my own conclusion that they can be directly related to constructionism/constructivism’s learning style. Generating and testing hypotheses allow students to develop their own conclusions by building off of content knowledge, vocabulary, and facts (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Developing these conclusions is done many times by the trial and error method, in which directly relates to Dr. Orey’s vision of what constructionism involves. Allowing students to perform tasks to create their own conclusions or develop their own meaning of a topic through first hand experience seems to be such an efficient way of learning.
With today’s fluent technology base that our students come into the classroom with, educators are able open the classroom, more often, to this style of learning. Instructional strategies such as generating and testing hypotheses becomes effective because the students are able to teach themselves. Educators are responsible for setting the structure and boundaries of testing the hypotheses and with today’s speedy technological software (spreadsheets, data collection tools, and other web resources) students are able to spend more time interpreting the data rather than gathering the data (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This interpretation, spoken of earlier, is exactly what constructivism entitles. The interpretation allows students to create their own developments of the topic and proves or disproves their prior beliefs.
Keeping students engaged, creative, and building information creates a positive classroom environment and often leads to a boost of self-esteem in the students along with the educator (Laureate 2009). Boosting self-esteem, especially in special education, can be such a positive attribute to instill in the students. Having first hand experience in their own learning allows student to gain confidence in their learning style, which, in return also may boost their learning. Educators that provide a positive, interactive, engaged classroom will also watch students develop educationally and this may all be provided by the proper use of constructivism/constructionism.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
The key component to constructionism/constructivism is an actively engaged learner. This approach to learning focuses solely on the individual learner building their own meaning on an individual topic (Laureate 2009). With the strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources I have drawn my own conclusion that they can be directly related to constructionism/constructivism’s learning style. Generating and testing hypotheses allow students to develop their own conclusions by building off of content knowledge, vocabulary, and facts (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Developing these conclusions is done many times by the trial and error method, in which directly relates to Dr. Orey’s vision of what constructionism involves. Allowing students to perform tasks to create their own conclusions or develop their own meaning of a topic through first hand experience seems to be such an efficient way of learning.
With today’s fluent technology base that our students come into the classroom with, educators are able open the classroom, more often, to this style of learning. Instructional strategies such as generating and testing hypotheses becomes effective because the students are able to teach themselves. Educators are responsible for setting the structure and boundaries of testing the hypotheses and with today’s speedy technological software (spreadsheets, data collection tools, and other web resources) students are able to spend more time interpreting the data rather than gathering the data (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This interpretation, spoken of earlier, is exactly what constructivism entitles. The interpretation allows students to create their own developments of the topic and proves or disproves their prior beliefs.
Keeping students engaged, creative, and building information creates a positive classroom environment and often leads to a boost of self-esteem in the students along with the educator (Laureate 2009). Boosting self-esteem, especially in special education, can be such a positive attribute to instill in the students. Having first hand experience in their own learning allows student to gain confidence in their learning style, which, in return also may boost their learning. Educators that provide a positive, interactive, engaged classroom will also watch students develop educationally and this may all be provided by the proper use of constructivism/constructionism.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Blog Post: Relationship of Instructional Strategies with the Cognitive Learning Theory
When thinking of Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory I seem to sum it up as a way to trigger students memories to retrieve already learned data through the use of auditory and visual learning methods. Conducting instruction in a way that students can relate to the materials introduced to something in their own life allows students to create a file, of some sort, that when that object of their own life is remembered, so is the content. Dr. Orey states that it is like a network and each idea is related or connected to other ideas (Laureate 2009). The instructional strategies presented in this week’s reading resources align perfectly with Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory.
The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to provide a well rounded structure for students to create a foundation of knowledge that they may use to retrieve, use, or organize data. All three of the strategies to promote learning touch base with Dr. Orey’s Cognitive Learning Theory by providing a well balanced use of auditory and visual learning components. Technology is readily available in these strategies also by allowing teachers and students to use a variety of technology tools to create visually appealing organizers (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to have a way to reinforce learning and keep the task manageable to students, in which, Dr. Orey says is one of the key components to success with this theory. For example, the use of multimedia tools allow educators to make a topic more relatable to students, which in return allows the students to make more connections in their own “network”.
The summarizing and note taking instructional strategy focuses on improving student’s ability to put new information into their own words (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This instructional strategy also relates to the Cognitive Learning Theory by allowing students to input extraneous information into their “network” in their own way, so it may be retrieved later down the road. It seems that a lot of the Cognitive Learning Theory is built upon how students organize information and this instructional strategy aids in the structure that it is organized in. For example, note taking has many different looks, as to how it is presented in the classroom, but it may use the presence of text along with pictographs that produce a strong impact on students (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). When note taking is presented in this form is goes along with Paivios’s Dual Coding Hypothesis, where students are believed to learn better with the aid of images instead of just text. Note taking and summarization go hand in hand with the Cognitive Learning Theory due to the fact that they allow students to store information in their own words and when presented correctly, images aid text so students can label the topic in their “network”.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
When thinking of Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory I seem to sum it up as a way to trigger students memories to retrieve already learned data through the use of auditory and visual learning methods. Conducting instruction in a way that students can relate to the materials introduced to something in their own life allows students to create a file, of some sort, that when that object of their own life is remembered, so is the content. Dr. Orey states that it is like a network and each idea is related or connected to other ideas (Laureate 2009). The instructional strategies presented in this week’s reading resources align perfectly with Dr. Orey’s description of the Cognitive Learning Theory.
The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to provide a well rounded structure for students to create a foundation of knowledge that they may use to retrieve, use, or organize data. All three of the strategies to promote learning touch base with Dr. Orey’s Cognitive Learning Theory by providing a well balanced use of auditory and visual learning components. Technology is readily available in these strategies also by allowing teachers and students to use a variety of technology tools to create visually appealing organizers (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). The use of cues, questions, and advanced organizers seem to have a way to reinforce learning and keep the task manageable to students, in which, Dr. Orey says is one of the key components to success with this theory. For example, the use of multimedia tools allow educators to make a topic more relatable to students, which in return allows the students to make more connections in their own “network”.
The summarizing and note taking instructional strategy focuses on improving student’s ability to put new information into their own words (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). This instructional strategy also relates to the Cognitive Learning Theory by allowing students to input extraneous information into their “network” in their own way, so it may be retrieved later down the road. It seems that a lot of the Cognitive Learning Theory is built upon how students organize information and this instructional strategy aids in the structure that it is organized in. For example, note taking has many different looks, as to how it is presented in the classroom, but it may use the presence of text along with pictographs that produce a strong impact on students (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). When note taking is presented in this form is goes along with Paivios’s Dual Coding Hypothesis, where students are believed to learn better with the aid of images instead of just text. Note taking and summarization go hand in hand with the Cognitive Learning Theory due to the fact that they allow students to store information in their own words and when presented correctly, images aid text so students can label the topic in their “network”.
References
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2009). Bridging learning theory, instruction,
and technology. Baltimore: Author
Pitler, H., Hubbell, E., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom
instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Instructional Strategies Correlation with Behaviorist Learning Theory
Blog Post: Instructional Strategies Correlation with Behaviorist Theory
Both instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources seem to line up accordingly to the behaviorist learning theory. As Dr. Orey stated, in his brief presentation, that operant conditioning, or the use of reinforcements and punishments, is the most powerful way of reaching academic goals when delivering instruction through the behaviorist learning theory, it directly relates to this week’s instructional strategies of reinforcing effort and homework/practice. One of our goals as educators is to prepare our students for a successful transition into the real world. I have always been taught that hard work, which directly relates to effort, is the key to success. Educators must influence and model great effort for students to realize its importance. When intended effort is exhibited by our students it needs prompt reinforcement to show its importance in both the classroom and real life situations. Teachers need to explicitly teach students the importance of effort and have students keep track of their own effort (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Collecting data is easily conducted in this day and age where teachers can integrate technology into the classroom, by using spreadsheets software and data collection tools to aide students in the direct feedback of their given effort.
Even the use of homework or additional practice of a specific skill taught in the classroom directly aligns with the behaviorist learning theory. Whether you would like to call it punishment or not is up to you. Just don’t ask our students; but the repetition of this certain task or skill allows our students learn and make correlations on their own by independently finding ways to successfully complete the given task. The use of homework, although wonderful for students to get extra work in a certain area can also cause some students to become frustrated with a task when it is complicated in their own eyes. This is why it is imperative that educators leave time during class for students to increase their conceptual understanding of the skills and practices (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). With the instantaneous ability to communicate and retrieve data through technology educators are able to expand their boundaries with creativeness to motivate students to complete the additional practice or homework. The repetitious reinforcements and punishments that students receive through completion or non-completion of doing homework actually correlates with the previous instructional strategy of reinforcing effort. The tracking of data on both instructional strategies can prove to be a worthy eye opener for many students to show the direct relationship of their effort to the current academic grade.
Both instructional strategies discussed in this week’s learning resources seem to line up accordingly to the behaviorist learning theory. As Dr. Orey stated, in his brief presentation, that operant conditioning, or the use of reinforcements and punishments, is the most powerful way of reaching academic goals when delivering instruction through the behaviorist learning theory, it directly relates to this week’s instructional strategies of reinforcing effort and homework/practice. One of our goals as educators is to prepare our students for a successful transition into the real world. I have always been taught that hard work, which directly relates to effort, is the key to success. Educators must influence and model great effort for students to realize its importance. When intended effort is exhibited by our students it needs prompt reinforcement to show its importance in both the classroom and real life situations. Teachers need to explicitly teach students the importance of effort and have students keep track of their own effort (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). Collecting data is easily conducted in this day and age where teachers can integrate technology into the classroom, by using spreadsheets software and data collection tools to aide students in the direct feedback of their given effort.
Even the use of homework or additional practice of a specific skill taught in the classroom directly aligns with the behaviorist learning theory. Whether you would like to call it punishment or not is up to you. Just don’t ask our students; but the repetition of this certain task or skill allows our students learn and make correlations on their own by independently finding ways to successfully complete the given task. The use of homework, although wonderful for students to get extra work in a certain area can also cause some students to become frustrated with a task when it is complicated in their own eyes. This is why it is imperative that educators leave time during class for students to increase their conceptual understanding of the skills and practices (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, Malenoski 2007). With the instantaneous ability to communicate and retrieve data through technology educators are able to expand their boundaries with creativeness to motivate students to complete the additional practice or homework. The repetitious reinforcements and punishments that students receive through completion or non-completion of doing homework actually correlates with the previous instructional strategy of reinforcing effort. The tracking of data on both instructional strategies can prove to be a worthy eye opener for many students to show the direct relationship of their effort to the current academic grade.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
