Bridging the World of Philanthropy: Present and Future

This paper was inspired by discussions from two events convened as part of the Bellagio Initiative on the Future of Philanthropy and DevelopmentThe Forum on Bridging Philanthropy and Development in Africa and Asia took place in June 2012. The Forum brought together development practitioners and philanthropic investors from the two continents to explore the major opportunities and risks in directing philanthropic investment towards development outcomes, and to identify the steps required to strengthen successful collaboration between the two sectors. The World of Philanthropy Present and Future was convened by the Resource Alliance in October 2012. The meeting brought together senior fundraisers from international NGOs; heads and directors of CSR from large companies; high net worth individuals; representatives from trusts and foundations; private wealth advisors; and representatives from bilateral and multilateral agencies. These global groups explored together key questions affecting philanthropy today and in the future, building on recommendations and reflecting upon key findings from the Bellagio Summit, hosted by the Resource Alliance in partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation and the Institute of Development Studies in 2011. Specifically they sought to:1. Determine the drivers behind the development agenda while considering how strategic cross-sectoral partnerships can ensure that giving is based on development needs2. Identify the conditions necessary to incentivise more innovative and potentially' risky' approaches to philanthropy 3. Explore what needs to change in order to grow giving globally for sustainable development

Foreign Language Learning In Knowledge Forums: using a knowledge-building forum in an EFL classroom

[EN] This paper presents the first phase of a study conducted to analyze Knowledge Building forums for evidence of second language acquisition. This study is an analysis of the posts within an existing forum in search of evidence of foreign language learning. The analysis found that the collaborative writing project shows evidence that the students passed through the stages of construction of knowledge within their foreign language classroom, however factors, such as confounding variables, inconsistencies in error types, and the small number of posts by the participants made it challenging to determine whether there is evidence of language acquisition for each student. The forum posts show evidence of knowledge acquisition, but further investigation is required to determine whether collaborative writing in knowledge forums is effective for foreign language acquisition.Manegre, M.; Gutiérrez-Colón, M.; Gisbert, M. (2019). Foreign Language Learning In Knowledge Forums: using a knowledge-building forum in an EFL classroom. The EuroCALL Review. 27(1):3-13. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2019.11150OJS313271Al-Jarf, R. (2007). Teaching Vocabulary to EFL College Students Online. CALL-EJ, 8(2). 1-16. http://econf.uob.edu.bh/conf1/pdf%20files/133.pdfBielaczyc, K. & Collins, A. (2005). Technology as a catalyst for fostering knowledge-creating communities. A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver & J. van der Linden (Eds.), Using technology to enhance learning. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Bielaczyc, K. & Collins, A. (2006). Fostering knowledge-creating communities. A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (2010). Can Children Really Create Knowledge?. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l'apprentissage et de la technologie, 36 (1). Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. https://doi.org/10.21432/T2ZP43Bereiter C., Scardamalia M. (2014) Knowledge Building and Knowledge Creation: One Concept, Two Hills to Climb. In: Tan S., So H., Yeo J. (Eds.) Knowledge Creation in Education. Education Innovation Series, pp. 35-52. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-047-6_3Bikowski, D. & Vithanage, R. (2016). Effects of Web-Based Collaborative Writing on Individual L2 writing Development. Language Learning & Technology, 20(1), 79-99. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/44447/1/20_01_bikowskivithanage.pdfBrantlinger, E., Jimenez, R., Klinger, J., Pugach, M. & Richardson, V. (2005). Qualitative Studies in Special Education. Exceptional Children. 71(2), 195-207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205Chen-Chung, L., Pin-Ching, W. & Shu-Ju, T., (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 Technologies. ReCALL 28(2), 104- 122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401600001XChuy, M., Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Prinsen, F., Resendes, M., Messina, R., Hunsburger, W., Teplovs, C., & Chow, A. (2010). Understanding the nature of science and scientific process: A theory building approach. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/T2GP4RCingel, D. P. & Sundar, S. (2012). Texting, techspeak, and tweens: The relationship between text messaging and English grammar skills. New Media & Society. 14(8).https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444812442927. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812442927Comas-Quinn, A., Mardomingo, R. & Valentine, C. (2009). Mobile blogs in language learning: Making the most of informal and situated learning opportunities. ReCALL 21(1), 96-112. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344009000032Consell Superior d'Avaluació del Sistema Educatiu (2015). Avaluació del projecte COMconèixer. Barcelona, Departament d'Ensenyament, Consell Superior d'Avaluació del Sistema Educatiu, col·lecció 'Documents' 32. http://cdl3.cdl.cat/COMconeixer/docs/Avaluacio_Projecte_COMconeixer.pdfCook, J. & Smith, M. (2004). Beyond formal learning: Informal community eLearning. Computers & Education. 43(1-2), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.003Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. MIT Press.Gunawardena, C. N, Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 17(4). https://doi.org/10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAGHeiser, S., Stickler, U. & Furnborough, C. (2013). Student training in the use of an online synchronous conferencing tool. CALICO Journal, 30(2), 226-251. https://doi.org/10.11139/cj.30.2.226-251Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1999). Making cooperative learning work, Theory Into Practice, 38:2, 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834Kim, B., Tan, L., & Bielaczyc, K. (2015). Learner-generated designs in participatory culture: What they are and how they are shaping learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(5), 545-555. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1067974Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Brendle, D. & Cress, U. (2017). All in Good Time: Knowledge Introduction, Restructuring, and Development of Shared Opinions as Different Stages in Collaborative Writing. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. 12(2), 195-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-017-9258-6Laferriere, T., Law, N. & Montaine, M. (2012). An International Knowledge Building Network for Sustainable Curriculum and Pedagogical Information. International Education Studies, 5(3), 148-160. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v5n3p148Montane, M., Amaros, C. & Gisbert, M. (2017). The COMknowledge project: evaluation of methodological aspects of the project based on pupils' perceptions. Unpublished conference paper.Moss, J. & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building in mathematics: Supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(4), 441- 465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9003-zNami, F, Marandi, S.S., Sotoudehnama, E., (2018). Interaction in a discussion list: An exploration of cognitive, social, and teaching presence in teachers' online collaborations. ReCALL,30(3), 375-398. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344017000349Paavola, S., Lipponen, L. & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of Innovative Knowledge Communities and Three Metaphors of Learning. Review of Educational Research. 74(4), 557-576. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004557Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1,37-68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0101_3Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer Support for Knowledge Based Communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences 3(3), 265-283. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0303_3Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, Pedagogy, and Technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.) Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, pp. 97-118. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.025Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Brett, C., Burtis, P.J., Calhoun, C., & Smith Lea, N. (1992). Educational applications of networked communal database. Interactive Learning Environments. 2(1), 45-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/1049482920020105Sun, Y., Franklin, T. & Gao, F. (2015). Learning Outside of Classroom: Exploring the Active Part of an Informal Online English Learning Community in China. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12340Thorne, S., Black, R. W. & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second language use, socialization, and learning in internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 802-821. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00974.xYim, S., Warschauer, M., (2017). Web-Based Collaborative Writing in L2 Contexts: Methodological Insights From Text Mining. Language Learning & Technology, 21(1), 146-165. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/44599/1/21_01_yimwarschauer.pdfZhan, Z., Xu, F. & Ye, H. (2011). Effects of an online learning community on active and reflective learners' learning performance and attitudes in a face-to-face undergraduate course. Computers & Education, 56(4), 961- 968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.01

Working collaboratively on the digital global frontier

An international online collaborative learning experience was designed and implemented in preservice teacher education classes at the University of Calgary, Canada and the University of Southern Queensland, Australia. The project was designed to give preservice teachers an opportunity to live the experience of being online collaborators investigating real world teaching issues of diversity and inclusivity. Qualitative research was conducted to examine the complexity of the online collaborative experiences of participants. Redmond and Lock’s (2006) flexible online collaborative learning framework was used to explain the design and the implementation of the project. Henri’s (1992) content analysis model for computer-mediated communication was used for the online asynchronous postings and a constant comparative method of data analysis was used in the construction of themes. From the findings, the authors propose recommendations for designing and facilitating collaborative learning on the digital global frontier

Social Justice Documentary: Designing for Impact

Explores current methodologies for assessing social issue documentary films by combining strategic design and evaluation of multiplatform outreach and impact, including documentaries' role in network- and field-building. Includes six case studies

Social Inclusion Health Indicators

Part of the Inclusive Cities Canada project, this report examines social inclusion from a population health perspective. Social inclusion is a key Social Determinant of Health, and is critical to addressing the social and health inequalities that also impact health

Rural America's emerging knowledge economy

Rural areas ; Rural development

Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis

Participatory modeling is increasingly recognised as an effective way to assist collective decision-making processes in the domain of natural resource management. This paper introduces a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory modeling approach. This framework – known as the ‘Protocol of Canberra’ – was developed through a collaboration between French and Australian researchers engaged in participatory modeling and evaluation research. The framework seeks to assess the extent to which different participatory modeling practices reinforce or divert from the theoretical assumptions they are built upon. The paper discusses the application of the framework in three case-studies, two from Australia and one from the Pacific island of the Republic of Kiribati. The paper concludes with some comments for future use of the framework in a range of participatory modeling contexts, including fostering consideration of why and how different methodological approaches are used to achieve project aims and to build a collective vision amongst diverse stakeholders.participation, modeling, evaluation, complex systems science