Approved Fall 2018 EDER 701.09 L01- Participatory ...saraheaton.ucalgaryblogs.ca/files/2018/08/Approved... · students are encouraged to participate in the asynchronous learning tasks

University of Calgary Werklund School of Education

Office of Graduate Programs in Education

EDER 701.09 L01 Participatory Methodology in Education

Fall 2018

Instructor: Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D. Office: EDT 916 Phone: 403-220-6378 Email: [email protected] Skype: SarahElaineEaton Office Hours / Virtual Office Hours: By appointment Academic Coordinator: Dr. Janet Groen Term Dates: Thursday, Sept. 6 to Friday, December 7, 2018 Mid-Term Break: Sunday, November 11 to Saturday, November 17, 2018 (No classes) Holidays (University closed): Thanksgiving Day – Monday, October 8, 2018 Remembrance Day – November 11, 2018 (University closed Monday 12, 2018) Synchronous Seminars: Thursday, September 6, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Thursday, October 4, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Thursday, November 1, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. COURSE DESCRIPTION: A survey of educational research methodologies broadly defined as ‘participatory’ – i.e., intended to support the involvement of as many interested and affected agents and agencies as possible and oriented toward meaningful, impactful, and sustainable action. EXTENDED COURSE DESCRIPTION: The aim of this course is to support your understanding of assumptions underpinning a range of theoretical traditions and their relationships to participatory research methodologies. You will examine and locate various theories according to their source and tradition, and will examine these theories against the backdrop of the intellectual traditions from which they originate. In examining each of these theories and their associated methodologies, you will begin to clarify your epistemological, ontological, and axiological stances in relation to participatory research methodologies. This is a reflexive process that will require you to begin to develop an understanding of your role as a researcher and your relationships to your research context and its participants. This course supports your coming to make sense of the nuanced relationship between the researcher and his or her research context by way of working through the early intricacies of placing the self within the research inquiry. It helps you to understand and challenge the assumptions you bring to research through such questions as: What is the nature of reality? How does a worldview influence a perspective on the nature of knowledge? Where and how does knowledge come to be located and positioned? What knowledge counts as a legitimate way of knowing? What are the variant ways in which we come to know? How do we come to know and understand through different interpretive frameworks? What are the ways in which knowledge is signified? How might previous experiences and values influence choices of a research inquiry, a methodology,

EDER 701.09 Eaton Fall 2018

2

and associated methods? In looking across these research traditions and methodologies, the intent is for you to delve into their pragmatics and problematics, as well as to develop an understanding of the relationship between methodologies and methods. To this end, we will examine closely the notion of commensurability in research designs. Throughout this course we will how we come to know what constitutes a research problem, how do we make sense/identify/mark/frame a particular lived experience as being researchable, what is the purpose of your research, what is the importance of the research and what are the ways in which a specific subject matter becomes the focus of inquiry. In particular, the course helps you get situated ethically and conceptually. LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

1) To consider the epistemological, ontological and axiological assumptions within the primary research paradigms and educational research methodologies.

2) To examine the conceptual influences behind participatory methodologies, and distinguish key movements and emphases in participatory methodologies.

3) To articulate an understanding of conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of educational research including the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology and methods.

4) To partake in a reflexive inquiry concerning your values, perspectives, beliefs, experiences and understandings about research.

COURSE DESIGN AND DELIVERY: This is a fully online course. Students will be expected to use a variety of technologies for ongoing engagement in course activities and learning tasks, such as: Desire2Learn (D2L) and Adobe Connect sessions. Desire2Learn (D2L) will be used to post class resources, including links to readings and video, and as a site for ongoing dialogue. An active University of Calgary email address is required. To access the course in D2L, you will enter your ucalgary.ca IT username and password. Adobe Connect will be used for three (3) synchronous seminars in this course. You will also need to have a head set with a microphone. To get the most out of the course students are encouraged to participate in the asynchronous learning tasks using the D2L learning environment and synchronous whole-class Adobe Connect sessions accompanied by Virtual Coffee Sessions. If you unable to participate live due to the time difference or unforeseen circumstances, it is your responsibility to inform the instructor in advance and propose and implement a plan to participate (e.g., watch the recordings, submit a brief reflection, and actively contribute to the follow-up online discussion). We recognize the importance of working in collaboration with others and learning with others in a scholarly community of inquiry and have designed learning tasks accordingly. Active participation is encouraged and will yield the greatest outcomes in terms of the quality of the learning experience. Note: Submit your work in Word (.doc or .docx), ensuring it meets APA standards.


3

Signature Pedagogy This course is uses inquiry-based learning as its signature pedagogy. Inquiry-based learning refers to “a range of instructional practices that promote student learning through student-driven and instructor-guided investigations of student ‘centered’ questions” (Justice, et al., 2007, p. 202). It is at once a process of engaging learners in discovering and creating knowledge and pedagogy grounded in a systematic process of moving toward higher levels of understanding (Justice, et al.). Inquiry-based learning integrates research and teaching through positioning learners and teachers as collaborators in the search for knowledge (Boyer Commission, 1998). The theoretical roots of inquiry-based learning are in constructivist and socio-cultural models of learning (Levy & Petrulis, 2009, 2012), which suggest “that knowledge acquired through active engagement with content results in deeper understanding and greater integration and internalization than traditional didactic, memory-oriented modes of knowledge transmission” (Justice, et al., 2007, p. 202). Inquiry-based learning is a translation of constructivist theory into practice that draws upon curiosity and exploration, as well as learner involvement in self-reflection and self-evaluation, as well as peer and instructor evaluation, to foster engaged learning.

Figure 1. The inquiry process, adapted from Justice, et al., 2007 1. Inquiry learning and Schulman’s (2005) three dimensions of signature pedagogies. The surface structure of inquiry-based learning includes learners, peers, and teachers engaging with a topic of interest and building basic knowledge from which an overarching question and possible answers are developed. Teachers work with students to identify, gather, assess relevant information and refine the question. As evidence is weighed and critiqued, deeper understandings are synthesized. Alternative options for communicating new understandings are examined and one or more is chosen. Learners reflect on feedback received and participate in evaluation processes. The deep structure of inquiry-based learning exists in “opening up a topic or field for exploration in an inquiry space in which students, teachers, and disciplinary experts can then collaboratively work on investigating the rigors and disciplines that shape and guide work in that field” (Friesen, 2013, p. 154). The implicit structure of inquiry includes professional valuing of learners’ choices and engagement in their own learning, taking into consideration self, peer, and instructor evaluations in the process of learning. It is underpinned by an ethical commitment to collaborative lifelong learning.


4

2. Why is inquiry-based learning a useful signature pedagogy? Providing undergraduate and graduate students with the experience of inquiry-based learning will allow them an opportunity to translate theories of learning into their own teaching practices. Active engagement with inquiry-based learning will provide students with opportunities to consider how to design, research, and facilitate teaching and learning practices that support 21st Century learners in technology mediated learning environments. Learning Journal I strongly recommend that you keep a learning journal throughout our course. Daily 10-minute entries that describe what you have done, learned, questioned, and found problematic will be very valuable records when you begin to write the final paper for this course.

References for Inquiry-based Learning as a Signature Pedagogy Note: These are not required readings. They are provided for reference and enrichment. Boyer Commission (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research

universities. Stony Brook, New York: Carnegie Foundation. http://contentdm.ucalgary.ca/digital/collection/ucpub/id/59213 Friesen, S. (2013). Inquiry-based learning. In R. Richey (Ed.) Encyclopedia of terminology for educational

communications and technology. New York: Springer Science + Business Media. Pp. 153-155

https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR718.html Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Sammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in higher education: Reflections

and directions on course design and teaching methods. Innovation in Higher Education, 31(4), 201-214. DOI 10.1007/s10755-006-9021-9.

https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/article/10.1007/s10755-006-9021-9 Levy, P., & Petrulis, R. (2009). First-year international undergraduate students’ experiences of learning through

inquiry. Reflecting Education, 5(1), 88-104. http://www.reflectingeducation.net/index.php/reflecting/article/view/78 Levy, P., & Petrulis, R. (2012). How do first-year university students experience inquiry and research, and what

are the implications for the practice of inquiry-based learning? Studies in Higher Education, 37(1), 85-101.

http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=70707541&site=ehost-live

McConnell, D. (2006). E-learning groups and communities. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary-ebooks/detail.action?docID=292110#

Harrell, M. C., & Bradley, M. A. (2009). Training manual: Data collection methods: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups Retrieved from http://www.mbamedicine.activemoodle.com/mod/resource/view.php?id=486

**Available here for free


5

Shulman, L.S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52-59. http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/0011526054622015

Also available in the library: https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/stable/20027998 REQUIRED READINGS: Required Textbooks: American Psychological Association. (2011). Publication manual of the American psychological association (6th

ed.), Washington DC: American Psychological Association. [Please note that this text is required for all courses in our program].

Bloomberg, L. & Volpe, M. (2015). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A roadmap from beginning to end.

(3rd ed). Los Angeles: Sage. [Please note that this textbook will also be required for future courses in our program.]

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge. Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (2017). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage. Additional readings for each week can be found in the weekly schedule, and are also posted on D2L. Recommended Readings Alvesson, M., & Soldgerg, K. (2009). (Post-) positivism, social constructionism, & critical realism: Three

reference points in the philosophy of science. Reflexive methodology: New vistas from qualitative research (pp. 15-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Retrieved from the Sage research database: http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/28039_02_Alvesson_2e_Ch_02.pdf

Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning

Sciences, 13(1), 37-41. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1 https://www-jstor-org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/stable/1466930

Brinkmann, S. (2017). The interview. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative

research (5th ed., pp. 576-599). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Confrey, J. (2006). The evolution of design studies as methodology. In R. Sawyer (Ed.) The Cambridge handbook

of the learning sciences (pp. 135-152). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press. [Note this chapter is available through the University of Calgary library’s e-book collection.]

https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.010 Kincheloe, J. McLaren, P., Steinberg, S., & Monzo, L. (2017). Critical pedagogy, and qualitative research:

Advancing the bricolage. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 235-260). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morse, J. (2017). Reframing rigor in qualitative inquiry. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook

of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 796-817). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Parchoma, G. (2015). Distributed cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning. In J. Spector (Ed.)

Encyclopedia of educational technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


6

https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary-ebooks/reader.action?ppg=264&docID=1996002&tm=1533227566157 **E-book license permits only one(1) online user at a time; per day, a user may save/print to PDF up to 194 pages WEEKLY COURSE SCHEDULE: A detailed, suggested daily schedule of Course Topics / activities. This schedule may change to meet the emerging needs and dynamics of the participants in the course.

Date / Topic(s) Preparation for Class – Reading and Tasks

In-Class & Follow-up Learning Activities & Tasks: Assignment Due Dates

Week 1 Sept. 6 to 9 (Short week) Getting Organized Revisiting the debate-Qualitative Research The Question of Commensurability

Preview the ‘Question of Commensurability’ Audio PowerPoint presentation in D2L. Read:

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2017). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 1-26). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Prepare feedback/reflective piece and questions for Adobe Connect discussions.

Adobe Connect Session: Thursday, September 6, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.

1. Brief Introductions 2. Discussion of course

overview, structure and organization of learning tasks: (a) Open discussions: postings & summaries; (b) Colloquium leadership groups: précis, moderation, and summaries (c) D2L Studio groups

3. Brief instructor presentation on the self-, peer, and instructor review/evaluation process, followed by Q&A.

4. Instructor synthesis of issues raised.

5. Organization of your contributions to the remainder of our course.

By Sat. Sept. 8 1. Contributions to D2L

discussions (Post reflexive piece concerning the readings/Adobe Connect. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research,


7

b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty, and c) where you find week’s readings problematic.

Week 2 September 10 to 16

Research paradigms and historical controversies

Lincoln, Y.S., Lynham, A., & Guba, E.G. (2017). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 108-150). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(5), 375-387. http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=18970163&site=ehost-live

On or before Wednesday, September 12 Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx. 500 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, September 15 Post a response to one other post from your D2L studio group.

Week 3 Sept. 17 to 23 Moving from paradigms to schools of thought and onto points of reference. Reflecting on personal perspectives on ontological, epistemological, and axiological research stances in relation to participatory educational research: Question of Validity and Evidence

Erickson (2017). A history of qualitative inquiry in social and educational research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 36-65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Denzin (2017). The elephant in the living room, or extending the conversation about the politics of evidence. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 839-853). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

On or before Wednesday, September 19: Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx. 500 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, Sept. 22: Post a response to one other post from your D2L studio group.

Week 4 Sept. 24 to 30 Précis due: Colloquium Leadership Group 1

Kemmis, S & McTaggart, R. (2007). Participatory action research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere. (271-330). Retrieved from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.473.4759&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Colloquium Leadership Group 1: On or before Wednesday, September 26 Prepare an overview (two pages) of issues raised in Kemmis, S & McTaggart, R. (2007), which, a) provides a critical discussion of


8

Overview of participatory research methodologies

Colloquium Leadership Group moderators: Presentation of one-page/PPT overview & discussion of articles

Participatory Action Research and b) provides one or two questions to begin a scholarly community discussion of issues raised in this reading. Peer participants in our Week 4 discussions, by Saturday, Sept. 29 a) respond to at least one question raised in the précis discussion. b) Each member of each D2L studio needs to prepare and post a brief response to the D2L discussion board on one of their studio members’ response. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators, respond to peer participants’ responses to questions raised in précis in our Week 4 D2L discussion threads. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators - summary, by Sunday, Sept. 30- provide (approx. 1 -page) overview of peer responses to question(s) raised in discussion.

Week 5 Oct. 1 to 7 Précis due: Colloquium Leadership Group 2 Notes on ethical and epistemological Underpinnings of Participatory Action Research

Chabot, C., Shoveller, S.A., Spencer, G., & Johnson, J.L. (2012). Ethical and Epistemological Insights: A Case Study of Participatory Action Research with Young People. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 7(2), 20-33. Retrieved from http://journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/doi/pdf/10.1525/jer.2012.7.2.20 Colloquium Leadership Group moderators: Presentation of one-page/PPT overview & discussion of articles

Adobe Connect Session: Thursday, October 4, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. Colloquium Leadership Group 2, On or before Wednesday, October 3 Prepare a (one-page) overview of issues raised this week’s reading, including a) a critical discussion of Participatory Action Research design (Include your thoughts on context/background of study, problem, purpose, data collection-analysis, findings & ethical considerations), and b) one or two questions to begin a scholarly community discussion of issues raised in this reading.


9

Peer participants in our Week 5 discussions, Saturday, Oct. 6 a) respond to at least one question raised in the précis discussion. b) Each member of each D2L studio needs to prepare and post a brief response to the D2L discussion board on one of their studio members’ response. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators, respond to peer participants’ responses to questions raised in précis in our Week 5 D2L discussion threads. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators - summary, by Sunday, Oct. 7 provide (approx 1 -page) overview of peer responses to question(s) raised in discussion.

Week 6 Oct. 8 to 14

Précis due: Colloquium Leadership Group 3

Thanksgiving Day – Monday, October 8, 2018 – University closed.

Participatory methodologies: A sample and a closer look at research design

Dahl, K.K.B. (2014). ‘From worse to better’: how Kenyan student-teachers can use participatory action research in health education. Educational Action Research, 22(2), 159-177. doi:10.1080/09650792.2013.859089 http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=95755601&site=ehost-live

Colloquium Leadership Group 3, On or before Wednesday, Oct. 10 Prepare a (one-page) overview of issues raised this week’s reading, including a) a critical discussion of Participatory Action Research design (Include your thoughts on context/background of study, problem, purpose, data collection-analysis, findings & ethical considerations), and b) one or two questions to begin a scholarly community discussion of issues raised in this reading. Peer participants in our Week 5 discussions, by Saturday, Oct. 13 a) respond to at least one question raised in the précis discussion. b) Each member of each D2L studio needs to prepare and post a brief response to the D2L


10

discussion board on one of their studio members’ response. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators, respond to peer participants’ responses to questions raised in précis in our Week 5 D2L discussion threads. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators - summary, by Sunday, Oct. 14 - provide (approx 1 -page) overview of peer responses to question(s) raised in discussion.

Week 7 Oct. 15 to 21 Participation Action Research for environmental education: Limitations and possibilities.

Bywater, K. (2014). Investigating the benefits of participatory action research for environmental education. Policy Futures in Education, 12(7), 920-932. Retrieved from: http://journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/doi/pdf/10.2304/pfie.2014.12.7.920

Colloquium Leadership Group 4, On or before Wednesday, Oct. 17 Prepare a (one-page) overview of issues raised this week’s reading, including a) a critical discussion of Participatory Action Research design (Include your thoughts on context/background of study, problem, purpose, data collection-analysis, findings & ethical considerations), and b) one or two questions to begin a scholarly community discussion of issues raised in this reading. Peer participants in our Week 7 discussions, by Sat., Oct. 20: a) respond to at least one question raised in the précis discussion. b) Each member of each D2L studio needs to prepare and post a brief response to the D2L discussion board on one of their studio members’ response. Colloquium Leadership Group moderators, respond to peer participants’ responses to questions raised in précis in our Week 5 D2L discussion threads.


11

Colloquium Leadership Group moderators - summary, by Sun. Oct. 21 provide (approx 1 -page) overview of peer responses to question(s) raised in discussion.

Week 8 Oct. 22 to 28 Continuing the discussion concerning Research Design

Bloomberg & Volpe (2015). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A roadmap from beginning to end. (3rd ed). Los Angeles: Sage. Read - Chapter 1. A complete dissertation: The big picture. And Chapter 5. Introduction to your study. In preparation for our Nov. 1st Adobe Connect session, prepare a brief draft (maximum 2-pages) ‘hypothetical’ (note that you will not be expected to undertake this study) research design overview that includes:

1. A problem statement 2. An over-arching research

question 3. A statement of purpose 4. A brief description of the

research context 5. An identification and brief

rationale for using a selected methodology

6. A definition of the phenomenon at the centre of your study and your unit of analysis.

By Wednesday, Oct. 24 All class members: Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx 300 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, Oct. 27 Post a response to one other post. Post an overview of your research design to your studio group’s thread. During Week 8, begin work on the U of C’s required Course on Research Ethics (CORE) tutorial. See: http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/researchers/ethics-compliance/tcps2-core-tutorial Note that completing this tutorial is a requirement of the University of Calgary, and optional but recommended in this course. You need to have a CORE tutorial completion certificate in order to apply for ethical approval of research prior to undertaking your doctoral research during our program.

Week 9 Oct. 29 to Nov. 4 Writing and Rigor in qualitative inquiry

Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E.A. (2017). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 818-838). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

By Wednesday, Oct. 31 All class members: Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx 300 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts


12

on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, Nov. 3 Post a response to one other post.

Week 10 Nov. 4 to 10 Indigenous ways of Knowing

Tuck, E. (2009). Re-visioning Action: Participatory Action Research and Indigenous Theories of Change. The Urban Review, 41(1), 47-65. doi: 10.1007/s11256-008-0094-x https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/article/10.1007/s11256-008-0094-x

Kovach, M. (2017). Doing Indigenous methodologies: A Letter to a research class. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 214-234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

By Wednesday, Nov. 7 All class members: Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx 300 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, Nov. 10 Post a response to one other post.

Mid-Term Break: Sunday, November 11 to Saturday, November 17, 2018 (No classes) Week 11 Nov. 18 to 25

Ethical Considerations & Implications for Validity and Reliability in Participatory Action Research

Read: Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). The Ethics of Educational and Social Research. In L. Cohen, L. Manion & K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education (7th ed., pp. 75 – 104). London: Routledge. Retrieved from https://ucalgary-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=01UCALG_ALMA21549689480004336&context=L&vid=UCALGARY&search_scope=EVERYTHING&isFrbr=true&tab=everything&lang=en_US Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Validity and reliability. In L. Cohen, L. Manion & K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education (7th ed., pp. 179 – 215). London: Routledge. Begin work on the draft of your reflexive methodology paper.

By Wednesday, Nov. 20 All class members: Post to your D2L studio group, an overview (approx 300 words), which provides a critical discussion of issues raised in this week’s readings. Include your thoughts on a) where these readings resonate with your perception(s) of educational research, b) where you are experiencing dissonance/difficulty. By Saturday, Nov. 24 Post a response to one other post.


13

CHANGES TO SCHEDULE: Please note that changes to the schedule may occur in response to student questions and conversations.

Week 12 Nov. 26 - Dec. 2 Exemplars of methodology papers.

Working week – Focus on reading and writing

Luo, L., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Semistructured interviews. In B. M. Wildemuth (Ed.), Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science (pp. 222-231). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Posted on D2L under Fair Dealing, as approved by U of C copyright office.

Fylan, F. (2005). Semi-structured

interviewing. In J. Miles & P. Gilbert (Eds.), A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 65-77). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Posted on D2L under Fair Dealing, as approved by U of C copyright office.

Note that with student-authors’ permissions, comparative exemplars of methodology chapters from previous, successful U of C candidacy proposals will be provided for your review in our Week 12 D2L discussion area.

Recommended: Post draft for peer review on D2L. Read exemplars of methodology papers.

Week 13 Dec. 3- Dec. 7 Reflexive methodology papers

Working on draft of reflexive methodology papers

Due: LT3 – Friday, Dec. 7 Submit your final Learning Task 3 - reflexive methodology paper to the Dropbox in our D2L website. Submit your work in Word format, adhering to APA standards.


14

LEARNING TASKS AND ASSESSMENT There are three required Learning Tasks for this course. The completion of all assigned tasks is required for a passing grade in the course.

LEARNING TASK NUMBER

DESCRIPTION OF LEARNING TASK PERCENT OF FINAL GRADE

GROUPING FOR TASK

Learning Task #1 Engagement in and contribution to our online scholarly community

35% Individual

Learning Task #2 Studio Group Précis and Colloquium Leadership 35% Group

Learning Task #3 Reflexive Methodology Paper 30% Individual Learning Tasks and Grading First, my assumption for grading doctoral level work is all doctoral learners are working at an “A” range. My feedback on your iterative and draft work will be based on my expectation that you are within the range of an “A” in our course and I will be oriented toward supporting you in that achievement. I have, ahead of time, outlined my expectations for your contributions to achieving “A” level work within evaluation rubrics. I will be delighted and challenged when I encounter “A+” level work. Submit all your work in Word format to the appropriate D2L Dropbox. Please do not e-mail your work to the course instructor. All work is to adhere to APA formatting and style.


15

Learning Task #1: Individual and collective engagement in our online scholarly community Due Dates: Various dates throughout the course

Rationale: Reflective and Collaborative Inquiry as a Sense-Making Process Reflection is essential to a fully lived professional life (Boreen, et al., 2000) and can be defined as an analytical process of data-gathering and sense-making through which individuals deepen understandings of teaching, learning and technology. Dewey (1910) characterized reflection as a sense-making process arising from a ‘felt need,’ usually in the form of questions about practices or learning or evaluation. Doctoral students will have multiple opportunities to participate in active scholarly discourse with fellow learners across our course, to reflect on, and to make sense of individual and community learning experiences.

Description In the model of a scholarly community each student will actively engage in and take responsibility for their own learning and the learning of community members. Engagement will take three forms:

1. Articulation of your initial and ongoing research and methodology interests in relation to our course. 2. Active engagement in all individual and group learning activities. 3. Reviewing and providing a focused 1-page peer review that responds to both the reviewer’s self-

evaluation question and the LT 3 rubric criteria for Learning Task 3.

CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT FOR LEARNING TASK 1 (35% OF FINAL COURSE GRADE) Criteria “Surface” Scholarly

Discourse: Fails to meet requirements (C+)

Meets All Requirements (B- to A-)

Deeper Scholarly Discourse: Meets All and Exceeds Some Requirements (A to A+)

Cons

truc

tive

Use

s of

Auth

orita

tive

Sour

ces You summarize

readings with little or no critical analysis or thoughtful interpretation.

You critically evaluate information sources and recognize that even the best are fallible.

You draw upon content from the readings and experiences, along with additional information sources, as data for his/her own knowledge building and ideas-improving processes.

Dem

ocra

tizin

g Kn

owle

dge

You add your contribution with little recognition of others in the group.

You recognize and praise everyone’s work and help others find needed information.

You treat all participants as legitimate contributors to the shared goals of the community; all have a sense of ownership of knowledge advances achieved by the group.


16

Epist

emic

Age

ncy

You demonstrate a personal sense of direction, power, motivation, and responsibility.

You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others.

You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others, using contrasts to spark and sustain knowledge advancement rather than depending on others to chart that course for you.

Idea

Div

ersit

y

You participate in brainstorming different ideas on D2L, Adobe Connect, Virtual Coffee Sessions.

You play an active role in putting forward different ideas on D2L, Adobe Connect, Virtual Coffee Sessions to create a dynamic environment.

You play an active role in putting forward different ideas to create a dynamic environment (on D2L, Adobe Connect, Virtual Coffee Sessions) in which contrasts, competition, and complementarity of ideas is evident, creating a rich environment for ideas to evolve into new and more refined forms.

Impr

ovab

le

Idea

s

You accept or reject ideas on the basis of logical argument and evidence.

You treat all ideas as improvable.

You treat all ideas as improvable by aiming to mirror the work of great thinkers in gathering and weighing evidence, and ensuring that explanations cohere with all available evidence.

Know

ledg

e Bu

ildin

g Di

scou

rse

Your contribution to discourse allows participants to express and gain feedback on their ideas, defend different points of view, arrive at conclusions.

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding.

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding and to advance understanding beyond the level of the most knowledgeable individual.


17

Learning Task #2: Group Précis and Colloquium Leadership Due Dates: Various dates throughout D2L sessions in our course

Rationale: Colloquia as critical, collaborative, reflective learning spaces Colloquia are intentional reading groups. Members read a series of papers on course topics and then engage in critical conversations on making sense of, comparing, and challenging concepts and issues presented in papers. In each of our colloquia, student groups will take a leadership role via providing a précis that outlines, issues, and debates in a required reading. Précis conclude with one or two questions to spark class debates. Colloquium leaders divide the tasks of moderating an asynchronous online discussion and summarizing an overview of that discussion. Through first providing a reading précis, then moderating an asynchronous discussion that outlines, issues, and debates, and focuses on one or two questions colloquia leaders construct a ‘space’ for scholarly engagement. Description As a learning community we will collaboratively consider relationships among assumptions underpinning a range of theoretical traditions and their relationships to participatory research methodologies. As colloquia leaders you will provide précis that lead discussions on colloquia topics. Précis briefly highlight your responses to issues, concerns, debates, and contentions in a peer-reviewed paper that are relevant to our shared learning context and conclude with one or two questions to spark critical discussions. Your peers and I will participate in colloquia discussions related to you précis questions. From your group of colloquium leaders you will identify colloquium moderators and a colloquium summarizer.

1. Précis will be co-authored by all members of a colloquium leadership group. 2. Précis must be post to our D2L course website as one-page, single-sided syntheses / responses

/challenges to a required reading. Each précis needs to conclude with one or two questions for class discussion. Colloquium leaders will facilitate an asynchronous discussion. Power Point presentations of précis are encouraged.

3. Précis author(s) will moderate an online discussion of concluding questions.


18

Assessment Rubric for Learning Task 2 Studio Group Colloquium Leadership = 35% of Final Course Grade

Criteria Does not meet

learning requirements

(B or lesser grade)

Minimally meets

learning requirements

(B+)

Marginally Meets

Learning requirements

(A-)

Clearly Meets Requirements

(A)

Exceeds Learning

Requirements (A+)

Tim

elin

ess

and

Leng

th Précis not

provided on time.

Précis provided on time, but is notably over the page limit.

Précis provided on time but is somewhat over the page limit.

Précis provided on time and is within the page limit.

Précis provided on time and is within the page limit.

Criti

calit

y an

d Cr

eativ

ity

Précis is an uncritical summary of paper / presentation and / or lacks a question

Précis is somewhat critical and addresses concerns, debates, and contentions in the paper / presentation And concludes with one or two questions

Précis is somewhat critical and somewhat focused on relevant issues, concerns, debates, or contentions and concludes with one or two questions

Précis clearly responds to issues, concerns, debates, and contentions in the paper / presentation that are relevant to our shared learning context and concludes with one or two questions to spark critical discussions

Précis creatively addresses issues, concerns, debates, and contentions in the paper / presentation that are relevant to our shared learning context and concludes with one or two questions to spark critical discussions

Faci

litat

ion

Colloquium leader(s) do not facilitate discussion of précis question(s)

Colloquium leader(s) make an effort to facilitate discussion of précis question(s)

Colloquium leader(s) take some responsibility for facilitating discussion of précis question(s)

Colloquium leader(s) facilitate discussion of précis question(s)

Sum

mar

y

Summarizers either do not provide a summary of the discussion or do not provide a summary on time.

Summarizers provide a general overview of the discussion

Summarizers provide a somewhat comprehensive overview of the discussion

Summarizers provide a timely, thorough, and succinct overview of comments and questions raised in the discussion of the précis


19

Learning Task #3 Reflexive Methodology Paper – Due December 7, 2017

Rationale: A reflexive methodology paper articulates your role as a researcher in relation to a research inquiry. The paper examines your position in relation to theoretical and methodological traditions, as well as in relation to your developing ontological, and epistemological, axiological stances. This learning task is specifically designed to help you articulate and challenge the assumptions you bring to educational research and to provide a basis for considering choices of particular methodologies and their associated methods, which you will examine in further detail throughout the remainder of your time in our doctoral program. Your reflexive methodology paper is a beginning place to consider your ‘self’ in relation to a continuum of possible positions that a researcher might take in relation to hers or his research interests, contexts, values, and beliefs. In short, you will not only have further opportunities to re-position your research over the course of our program, but you will also be expected to do so. Thus, it is especially important that you view your work on Learning Task 3 as a work-in-progress, situated in the broader context of continuing to develop your identity as an educational researcher. Description

Compose a reflexive methodology paper, 12-15 pages (double-spaced, 12 point font, 1 inch margins), which addresses your understanding of your role as an educational researcher. In this paper, you will articulate a your current understanding of your role as a researcher in terms of your perspectives on:

• Relationships between theoretical and methodological traditions in educational research. • Relationships between methodologies and methods in educational research. • Ontological, epistemological, and axiological influences on your methodological preferences. • Being more or less aligned to an existing research paradigm, school of thought, and/or point of

reference in the your current perspective on educational research. • Articulating assumptions you bring to notions of how educational research can be rigorous and

produce tangible results. • Conceptualizing an inquiry. • Your current understanding of the interwoven nature of 1) your perspective on where learning is

situated, 2) the structure of an educational research problem, 3) a worthwhile researchable, overarching research question, 4) a phenomenon and/or unit of a analysis that is worthwhile investigating, 5) a chosen methodology and its methods, 6) Ethical considerations and questions concerning validity and reliability.

• Situating your 'self,’/ your emergent identity as an educational researcher in the context of your research context/originating, [birth] discipline, and your current educational research interest(s).

In addition: Your Task 3 paper will include a cover page and a well-formed APA reference list (which are not included in the page-length restriction).


20

Evaluation Rubric for Learning Task 3 Reflexive Methodology Paper = 30 % of Final Course Grade

Criteria for Evaluation

Does not meet learning

requirements (C+ or lesser

grade)

Minimum Pass (B-)

Satisfactory or Good

Performance (B/B+)

Very Good to Excellent

Performance (A-/A)

Outstanding (A+)

Procedural, Structural, and Stylistic Criteria = 30% of Task Grade

Punc

tual

ity, W

ord

Lim

it,

& P

agin

atio

n

Final paper is not submitted on time, is 30% or more over or under the page limit, and/or is not paginated.

Final paper submitted on time, but is 20% over or under the page limit, and/or is not paginated.

Final paper submitted on time and is paginated, but is more than 10% over or under the page limit.

Final paper submitted on time, paginated, and within the page limit.

Cove

r Pa

ge The final paper

does not include a cover page.

The final paper includes a cover page that outlines the course name, student name, and date of submission.

Intr

oduc

tion

Either no introduction or one that poorly or partially situates the reader in the context of the concern, debate, or contention addressed in the paper

An introduction that outlines the content, scope, and organization of the paper

An introduction that describes the content, scope, and organization of the paper

A well-articulated introduction that provides a clear, logical description of content, scope, and organization of the paper

A well-articulated introduction that provides a clear, logical, and succinct description of content, scope, and organization of the paper, which draws the reader’s attention to a central concern, debate, or contention

Org

aniza

tion

The final paper is not well organized. The paper lacks clarity and logical flow, and has limited use of transitions and/or logical headings.

The final paper is somewhat well organized, flows logically, and includes transitions and logical headings.

The final paper is quite well organized. The review has clarity, includes transitions, headings, and subheadings.

The final paper is very well organized. The review has clarity, simplicity, parsimony, which includes clear transitions and systematic use of headings and subheadings.


21

APA

Styl

e

The Final paper lacks several of the following features: double spacing, 12-point serf font, 1-inch margins, APA-style headings, or a nearly complete Version 6 APA reference list.

The Final paper lacks some of the following features: double spacing, 12-point serf font, 1-inch margins, APA-style headings, or a nearly complete Version 6 APA reference list.

The Final paper is double-spaced in a 12-point serf font, has 1-inch margins, APA-style headings, and includes a nearly error-free and complete Version 6 APA reference list.

The Final paper follows APA formatting which includes, but is not limited to: double-spaced in a 12-point serf font, has 1-inch margins, APA-style headings, and includes well -formed Version 6 APA reference list for all citations.

Key

mov

emen

ts a

nd e

mph

ases

in p

artic

ipat

ory

met

hodo

logy

The paper does not outline key movements and emphases in participatory methodology.

The paper briefly addresses movements and emphases in participatory methodology, but lacks a perspective on their influences in the field of educational research.

The paper briefly outlines key movements and emphases in participatory methodology and includes a personal perspective on their influences in the field of educational research.

The paper clearly outlines key movements and emphases in participatory methodology and includes a critical, personal perspective on their influences in the field of educational research.

The paper clearly and succinctly outlines key movements and emphases from a variety of perspectives in participatory methodology, and demonstrates a critical, personal perspective on their influences in the field of educational research.


22

Loca

ting

your

self

in re

latio

n to

rese

arch

inqu

iries

: Yo

ur o

ntol

ogic

al, e

pist

emol

ogic

al, a

nd a

xiol

ogic

al

stan

ces

The paper either does not address the development of your identity in relation to educational research inquiries, or lacks commentary on your current ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances.

The paper briefly addresses some element of your identity in relation to educational research inquiries, and provides a descriptive account of your current ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances.

The paper somewhat addresses the development of your identity in relation to educational research inquiries, including your current ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances.

The paper clearly articulates the development of your identity in relation to educational research inquiries, including your current ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances.

The paper clearly articulates the development of your identity in relation to multiple perspectives on educational research inquiries, and clearly links your current ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances to a well-defined approach to research inquiries.

The

inte

rwov

en n

atur

e of

re

sear

ch q

uest

ions

, res

earc

h m

etho

dolo

gy, a

nd m

etho

ds The paper does

not address the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology, and methods.

The paper demonstrates some understanding of the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology, and methods.

The paper demonstrates a fairly well developed understanding of the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology, and methods.

The paper clearly and critically addresses the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology, and methods.

The paper takes into account multiple perspectives, and clearly and critically addresses the interwoven nature of research questions, research methodology, and methods.

Taki

ng a

refle

xive

stan

ce in

co

ncep

tual

izing

an

inqu

iry a

nd

choo

sing

a re

sear

ch m

etho

dolo

gy The paper does

not address the notion of situating your ‘self’ as a researcher within an approach to conceptualizing an inquiry and choosing a research methodology.

The paper briefly mentions the notion of situating your ‘self’ as a researcher with in an approach to conceptualizing an inquiry and choosing a research methodology.

The paper demonstrates a partially formed understanding of the process of situating your ‘self’ as a researcher within an approach to conceptualizing an inquiry and choosing a research methodology.

The paper clearly demonstrates a reflexive stance in your approach to conceptualizing an inquiry and choosing a research methodology.

Against a backdrop of multiple possible perspectives, the paper clearly demonstrates a reflexive stance to your approach to conceptualizing an inquiry and choosing a research methodology.


23

Enga

ging

with

a

part

icip

ator

y re

sear

ch

met

hodo

logy

The paper does not articulate your engagement with a participatory research methodology.

The paper briefly mentions engaging with a participatory research methodology.

The paper demonstrates a partially formed understanding of engaging with a participatory research methodology.

The paper clearly and critically articulates your engagement with a participatory research methodology.

Cons

truc

tive

use

of

auth

orita

tive

so

urce

s

The paper includes few or no relevant citations to course readings and broader scholarly literature that support claims made.

The paper includes some relevant citations to course readings and broader scholarly literature that support some claims made.

The paper includes sufficient relevant citations to course readings and broader scholarly literature that critically substantiate most claims made.

The paper includes citations to a range of course readings and broader scholarly literature that critically substantiate all major claims made.

The paper includes citations to a range of course readings and broader scholarly literature that critically substantiate and contextualize all major claims made.

Scho

larly

W

ritin

g

The final paper does not meet standards for

scholarly writing.

The final paper meets

some standards for

scholarly writing.

The final paper meets most

standards for scholarly writing.

The paper is of near

publishable quality.

The paper is of publishable

quality.


24

GRADUATE PROGRAMS IN EDUCATION: GRADING SCALE

Distribution of Grades* Grade GP

Value Percent Graduate Description

A+ 4.0 95 - 100 Outstanding

A 4.0 90 - 94 Excellent - superior performance showing comprehensive understanding of the subject matter

A- 3.7 85 - 89 Very good performance B+ 3.3 80 - 84 Good performance B 3.0 75 - 79 Satisfactory performance.

Note: The grade point value (3.0) associated with this grade is the minimum acceptable average that a graduate student must maintain throughout the program as computed at the end of each year of the program.

B- 2.7 70 - 74 Minimum pass for students in the Faculty of Graduate Studies

C+ 2.3 65 - 69

All grades below B- are indicative of failure at the graduate level and cannot be counted toward Faculty of Graduate Studies course requirements.

C 2.0 60 - 64 C- 1.7 55 - 59 D+ 1.3 50 - 54 D 1.0 45 - 49 F 0.0 < 45

*Based upon Faculty of Graduate Studies 2018/2019 Calendar It is at the instructor's discretion to round off either upward or downward to determine a final grade when the average of term work and final examinations is between two letter grades. ---------------------------- Werklund School of Education Appeals Policy and Process

• http://werklund.ucalgary.ca/gpe/werklund-school-education-appeals-policy-amp-process Graduate Programs in Education Deferral of Term Work Policy

• URL: https://werklund.ucalgary.ca/gpe/files/gpe/deferral-of-term-work-for-instructors-students_final_0.pdf

Universal Student Ratings of Instruction (USRIs) Students are strongly encouraged to complete course evaluations for each course taken in their program. Student feedback on their experience in a course is taken very seriously by the Werklund School of Education in timetabling and staffing courses. Student feedback via the Course Evaluation is used to monitor the quality of teaching, the quality of students’ learning experiences and the quality of course design in Graduate Programs in Education. Student Mental Health The University of Calgary recognizes the pivotal role that student mental health plays in physical health, social connectedness and academic success, and aspires to create a caring and supportive campus community where individuals can freely talk about mental health and receive supports when needed. We encourage you to explore the excellent mental health resources available throughout the university community, such as counselling, self-help resources, peer support or skills-building available through the SU Wellness Centre (Room


25

370, MacEwan Student Centre, ucalgary.ca/wellnesscentre/counselling/personal/) and the Campus Mental Health Strategy website (ucalgary.ca/mentalhealth). Students are advised to become familiar with the Faculty of Graduate Studies policies and the University of Calgary support services in these areas: intellectual property, academic integrity, plagiarism, research ethics, effective writing, and English language proficiency. Information about these topics is available through the following web addresses: • Plagiarism + academic misconduct: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/current/gs-o.html • Intellectual Honesty: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/current/gs-m.html • Integrity: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/grad/current/gs-r.html • Research Ethics: http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/researchers/ethics-compliance • My Grad Skills: http://grad.ucalgary.ca/mygradskills • Intellectual Property: http://grad.ucalgary.ca/current/managing-my-program/academic-

integrity/intellectual-property • Student Success: http://www.ucalgary.ca/ssc/ • Graduate Students’ Association: https://gsa.ucalgary.ca • Student Ombuds Office: https://www.ucalgary.ca/ombuds/ • Campus Mental Health resources & SU Wellness Centre:

https://www.ucalgary.ca/wellnesscentre/services/mental-health-services • Campus Mental Health Strategy: http://ucalgary.ca/mentalhealth/ Graduate Studies Calendar, Excerpts on Plagiarism: O.1.a) Definitions 1. Plagiarism - Plagiarism involves submitting or presenting work as if it were the student’s own work when it is not. Any ideas or materials taken from another source written, electronic, or oral must be fully and formally acknowledged. (b) Parts of the work are taken from another source without reference to the original author. (c) The whole work (e.g., an essay) is copied from another source, and/or, (d) A student submits or presents work in one course which has also been submitted in another course (although it may be completely original with that student) without the knowledge of or prior agreement of the instructor involved. O.1.b) Penalties, can include and are not limited to: 1. Failing Grade - A student may be given a failing grade in either an exercise or course in which that student is found guilty of plagiarism, cheating or other academic misconduct. A student may not avoid a failing grade by withdrawing from the course. 2. Disciplinary probation. 3. Suspension. 4. Expulsion. Copyright: All material used in the course is for the sole use of the individual and should not be recopied in either print or digital format. For copyright guidelines, including those relating to photocopying and electronic copies, please refer to the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) fair dealing guidelines: http://library.ucalgary.ca/copyright


26

Academic Accommodations – It is the students’ responsibility to request academic accommodations. If you are a student with a documented disability who may require academic accommodations and have not registered with Student Accessibility Services, please contact them at 403-220-6019. Students who have not registered with Student Accessibility Services are not eligible for formal academic accommodations. More information about academic accommodations can be found at www.ucalgary.ca/access .

Accommodations on Protected Grounds other than Disability Students who require an accommodation in relation to their coursework or to fulfill requirements for a graduate degree, based on a protected ground other than disability, should communicate this need, preferably in writing, to their Instructor or the appropriate Associate Dean, Department Head or the department/faculty designated contact person. Students who require an accommodation unrelated to their coursework or the requirements for a graduate degree, based on a protected ground other than disability, should communicate this need, preferably in writing, to the Vice-Provost (Student Experience). For additional information on support services and accommodations for students with disabilities, visit www.ucalgary.ca/access/. Campus Security provides a range of services intended to promote and facilitate a safe and secure learning and living environment, e.g. the SafeWalk program for students attending classes on campus. For more information please visit http://www.ucalgary.ca/security/ or telephone 403-220-5333. The Freedom of Information Protection of Privacy Act (FOIPP) prevents instructors from placing assignments or examinations in a public place for pickup and prevents students from access to exams or assignments other than their own. Therefore, students and instructors may use one of the following options: return/collect assignments during class time or during instructors' office hours, students provide instructors with a self-addressed stamped envelope, or submit assignments, or submit/return assignments as electronic files attached to private e-mail message.

Documents

Approved Fall 2018 EDER 701.09 L01- Participatory ...saraheaton.ucalgaryblogs.ca/files/2018/08/Approved... · students are encouraged to participate in the asynchronous learning tasks