Webs of activity in online course design and teaching

In this study, we followed three faculty members' experiences with designing and teaching online courses for the first time. In order to complete the activity, the faculty members had to work -collaboratively with others across the university. Activity theory provided a framework within which to study faculty members' collaborative activities with members of different activity systems that had different goals, tools, divisions of labor and accountabilities. In concordance with activity theory, such differences led to contradictions, disturbances, and transformations in thinking and work activities. The results of the study have implications for individuals and systems undertaking technology integration in teaching

The mathematical “i”

The negative numbers were full of dismay We have no roots, they were heard to say What, they went on, would be the fruit Of trying to compute our square root? Matters seem to be getting out of hand Since the negatives have taken a stan

Teachers\u27 Technological Pedagogical Knowledge and Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-Based Technology Integration Reframed

In this paper we critically analyze extant approaches to technology integration in teaching, arguing that many current methods are technocentric, often omitting sufficient consideration of the dynamic and complex relationships among content, technology, pedagogy, and context. We recommend using the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework as a way to think about effective technology integration, recognizing technology, pedagogy, content and context as interdependent aspects of teachers’ knowledge necessary to teach content-based curricula effectively with educational technologies. We offer TPACK-based “activity types,” rooted in previous research about content-specific activity structures, as an alternative to existing professional development approaches and explain how this new way of thinking may authentically and successfully assist teachers’ and teacher educators’ technology integration efforts

Of Art and mathematics paradoxes : true AND/OR false?

This is the �irst sentence of this article� Clearly the sentence above is true (not highly informative but true). Contrast this to the next sentence, below: This is the first sentence of this article how the second statement, though identical to the first, is clearly false. Such sentences that speak about themselves are called self-referential sentences, because they are, in a way, looking at themselves in the mirror and describing themselves

Paradoxes: Part 2 of 2

This is not the first sentence of this article. The above sentence can be both true and false. It is clearly the first sentence of this article. So it is false, because it says it is not the first sentence! But because this is part 2 of our article on Paradoxes, if we regard both parts as one article, it is true! We leave it to you to resolve this paradox

Self-similarity

This idea of repeating a similar shape (often at a different scale) over and over again, is called self-similarity. In other words, a self-similar image contains copies of itself at smaller scales. A simple example appears in Figure 2: a repeated pattern for a square that is copied, rotated and shrunk by a factor of 1/√2

Introducing symmetry

In our November column we introduced the concept of ambigrams—the art of writing words in surprisingly symmetrical ways. Consider an ambigram of the word “Symmetry"

ICTs in schools: Why focusing policy and resources on educators, not children, will improve educational outcomes

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have long been perceived as having the potential to transform education and student learning, especially in developing countries. The underlying belief of many initiatives has been that learning will happen if students and learners are provided direct access to ICTs. However, despite years of research, there is little evidence of the value of these approaches. Ideas such as the massive open online course (MOOC) and One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project were initially hailed as the “next big thing” in education because they were seen as a way to offer access to education to all. But most studies show that these initiatives are failing to deliver: course completion rates on MOOCs are usually less than 7 percent, often because of a lack of personal contact.1 A similar cycle of hype and then disappointment has been seen in the much-touted Hole-In-The-Wall project. Although a wellintentioned attempt to deal with the problems of access and other constraints in developing areas, it has not been successful in making any lasting or meaningful educational change