Teach learners about digital citizenship with free resources using Be Internet Awesome .  

 

Advertisements

Teachers, this is a good PD offer for all who need to catch up on digital literacy at https://blog.google/topics/education/bringing-digital-citizenship-school-curriculum/ .  Did I mention it is free?  And did I mention that you will receive a free curriculum for your own teaching after the completion of the course?  Excerpt of Course content:

The course includes five interactive units:

  • Teaching students about internet safety and privacy, including setting strong passwords and privacy settings
  • Staying safe on the go by securing your mobile device and avoiding harmful downloads on your smartphone
  • Savvy searching, to help students evaluate the credibility of online sources of information
  • Staying safe from phishing and other scams
  • Managing online reputation, including protecting sensitive information

Excerpt of a very interesting reading:

Screenshot 2017-10-13 19.35.10.png

 

at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/knowledge-experience-creativity-dr-anadi-sahoo/

Posted: 15/10/2017 by broadyesl in Uncategorized

Two second-order meta-analyses synthesized approximately 100 years of research on the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K–12 students’ academic achievement. Outcomes of 13 ability grouping meta-analyses showed that students benefited from within-class grouping (0.19 ≤ g ≤ 0.30), cross-grade subject grouping (g = 0.26), and special grouping for the gifted (g = 0.37), but did not benefit from between-class grouping (0.04 ≤ g ≤0.06); the effects did not vary for high-, medium-, and low-ability students. Three acceleration meta-analyses showed that accelerated students significantly outperformed their nonaccelerated same-age peers (g = 0.70) but did not differ significantly from nonaccelerated older peers (g = 0.09). Three other meta-analyses that aggregated outcomes across specific forms of acceleration found that acceleration appeared to have a positive, moderate, and statistically significant impact on students’ academic achievement (g = 0.42).

at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654316675417?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_content=What%20One%20Hundred%20Years%20of%20Research%20Says%20About%20the%20Effects%20of%20Ability%20Grouping%20and%20Acceleration%20on%20K%E2%80%93&utm_campaign=7JA252&utm_term=

 

 

MOOCS are Dead. What’s Next?

Posted: 15/10/2017 by broadyesl in MOOC, Uncategorized

Read MOOCs Are “Dead.” What’s Next? Uh-ohat  https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/just-visiting/moocs-are-dead-whats-next-uh-oh

Excerpt:

Professional development programs are based on different theories of how students learn and different theories of how teachers learn. Reviewers often sort programs according to design features such as program duration, intensity, or the use of specific techniques such as coaches or online lessons, but these categories do not illuminate the programs’ underlying purpose or premises about teaching and teacher learning. This review sorts programs according to their underlying theories of action, which include (a) a main idea that teachers should learn and (b) a strategy for helping teachers enact that idea within their own ongoing systems of practice. Using rigorous research design standards, the review identifies 28 studies. Because studies differ in multiple ways, the review presents program effects graphically rather than statistically. Visual patterns suggest that many popular design features are not associated with program effectiveness. Furthermore, different main ideas are not differentially effective. However, the pedagogies used to facilitate enactment differ in their effectiveness. Finally, the review addresses the question of research design for studies of professional development and suggests that some widely favored research designs might adversely affect study outcomes.

Download at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3102/0034654315626800?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_content=How%20Does%20Professional%20Development%20Improve%20Teaching%3F&utm_campaign=7JA252&utm_term=

Two second-order meta-analyses synthesized approximately 100 years of research on the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K–12 students’ academic achievement. Outcomes of 13 ability grouping meta-analyses showed that students benefited from within-class grouping (0.19 ≤ g ≤ 0.30), cross-grade subject grouping (g = 0.26), and special grouping for the gifted (g = 0.37), but did not benefit from between-class grouping (0.04 ≤ g ≤0.06); the effects did not vary for high-, medium-, and low-ability students. Three acceleration meta-analyses showed that accelerated students significantly outperformed their nonaccelerated same-age peers (g = 0.70) but did not differ significantly from nonaccelerated older peers (g = 0.09). Three other meta-analyses that aggregated outcomes across specific forms of acceleration found that acceleration appeared to have a positive, moderate, and statistically significant impact on students’ academic achievement (g = 0.42).

at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654316675417?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_content=What%20One%20Hundred%20Years%20of%20Research%20Says%20About%20the%20Effects%20of%20Ability%20Grouping%20and%20Acceleration%20on%20K%E2%80%93&utm_campaign=7JA252&utm_term=