Week 2 / Day 10

	BASE GROUP CHECK-IN Check-in Question: *What was your 'path not taken'?*[formidable id=6]
	CONSTRUCTIVE CONTROVERSY: Is Rose’s research unduly influenced by his own subjectivity? Reading: Mike Rose: The Mind at Work Controversy: Is Rose’s research unduly influenced by his own subjectivity? [formidable id=9] View each group’s final consensus statements here!
	Reading: Observational Research Reading Remler, D.K. & Van Ryzin, G.G. (2014). (Chapter 12) Observational studies with control variables. Research methods in practice: Strategies for description and causation, 2nd ed. (pp. 377-402). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [RVR Ch. 12 QUIZ] Continue reading → [OPTIONAL] Ethical Considerations Naturalistic Settings Pepler, D. J., & Craig, W. M. (1995). A peek behind the fence: Naturalistic observations of aggressive children with remote audiovisual recording. Developmental Psychology, 31, 548-553. Online Experiments Goel, V. (2014). As data overflows online, researchers grapple with ethics. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/13/technology/the-boon-of-online-data-puts-social-science-in-a-quandary.html. Online Participants Paolacci, G. & Chandler, J. (2014). Inside the Turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 184-188.
	READINGS: Constructivism Reading Schunk, D. H. (2011). (Chapter 6) Constructivism. Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th Edition) (pp. 228-277). Boston, MA: Addison Wesley. Continue reading → [OPTIONAL] Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational Psychologist, 42, 99-107. Clark, R., Kirschner, P., & Sweller, J. (Spring 2012). Putting students on the path to learning: The case for fully guided instruction. American Educator, 6-11.
	RESEARCH REPORT #4 Research Report: [formidable id=8]
	LUNCH: Free Time! Free time during lunch today! Refresh and prepare to say “Good-bye!”
	ACTIVITY: Behaviorism Video Present your behaviorism videos! [THINKING ABOUT TECHNOLOGY] Would this experience have been different without technology? With different technology? How would you know?
	ACTIVITY: Show & Tell Share and revise: Research interest Logic model Portfolio
	LOOKING AHEAD Assignments Audio Project on Motivation (Part 1). The Audio Project will ultimately be presented as part of your Portfolio (website). Research Reports #5 and #6 (written only). These will be submitted here for #5, and here for #6. Article Critique #3. For more information on Article #3, please read here. Read/Prepare Koehler, M.J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. [discussion: Q1, Q2, Q3 ] [OPTIONAL] Baker, R., & Siemens, G. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 253-272). doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.016 Continue reading → Schunk, D. H. (2011). (Chapter 7) Cognitive learning processes. Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th Edition) (pp. 278-344). Boston, MA: Addison Wesley. [discussion: Q1, Q2, Q3 ] Schunk, D. H. (2011). (Chapter 8 ) Motivation. Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th Edition) (pp. 345-398). Boston, MA: Addison Wesley. [discussion: Q1, Q2, Q3 ] Continue reading → Look Ahead As always, try and work ahead whenever possible.
	BASE GROUP CHECK-OUT [formidable id=7]