Collaborative Annotated Bibliography

In Web 2.0, we collaborated to create an annotated bibliography on articles that related to teaching with technology. We used a shared Google Doc to create the bibliography. Our task was for each cohort member to post three articles. Two of the peer-reviewed articles I posted made the final version. The third was cut from the Google Doc because it was determined irrelevant. The article focused on the history of the middle school model. Technology was not the focus, that’s for sure. But I posted it because I teach middle school and the article helped me understand the challenges middle school teachers face while addressing classroom management and the overall structure of mid-level classes, which includes the usage of technology.

One of the most interesting articles I read in the annotated bibliography assignment turned out to be “The Dialogic Potential of ePortfolios: Formative Feedback and Communities of Learning Within a Personal Learning Environment.” Ehiyazaryan-White concluded that ePortfolios had multiple advantages when using them as a professional learning environment (PLE). “The purpose of this research was to explore learners’ use of the ePortfolio, a personal learning environment, as a mechanism for peer support and community building,” Ehiyazaryan-White wrote.

Now that I am a week or so away from finishing my ONID degree, I feel the need to briefly reflect on the purpose of My biggest question regarding our ePortfolio is why ONID students aren’t allowed to take the information we gathered and posted throughout the program and use it on the comprehensive final. A few questions on the exam could have been answered by using posts previous courses. I also wonder why there isn’t an overall evaluation of our website at the end of our program. During my Masters of Art in Teaching program for UAS we had to put together a portfolio in a binder in order to graduate. It was submitted, evaluated and returned to us via snail mail. Will someone evaluate my site?

The following are two peer-reviewed articles I contributed to the annotated bibliography assignment:

Broadbent, J. (2017) Comparing online and blended learner’s self-regulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24–32.
This article draws attention to a couple of main points: 1. Very few studies have compared the effectiveness of Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) strategies in both online and blended learning environments; 2. This study determined there is a greater need to study and understand how learners can best utilize SRL strategies in order to be successful in school; 3. Little to no work has been done to study the effectiveness of SRL strategies on academic progress.

Chang, C., et al. (2018). Effects of digital game-based learning on achievement, flow and overall cognitive load. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4).
Very few studies have researched the differences between Digital Game-Based Learning and Computer-Based Learning. This study conducted in Taiwan proved to be significant because it studied for the first time the relationship among flow, learning effect and cognitive load. “There is now evidence to support the theoretical assumptions surrounding these vital learning variables. The current results also demonstrate the importance of flow theory, cognitive load theory, and cognitive theory of multimedia learning within the context of DGBL instructional modalities” (Chang, Warden, Liang, Lin, 2018).


Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *