Week 6 Final Paper And Folio You Will Create A Folio That In

Week 6 Final Paper And Folioyou Will Create A Folio That Includes Rede

You will create a Folio that includes redesigned activities from prior coursework in your program (MACI, MAECEL, MAED, MASE, or MATLT) that demonstrate your competency with your Programs Learning Outcomes, which are also the Course Learning Outcomes for EDU 696. Additionally, you will write a narrative reflection of your experience with the program and the Folio construction. The overarching goal of this Final Paper and Folio assignment is to showcase learning from your Master’s Program in a consolidated, web-based format that can easily be shared with anyone: colleagues, potential or current employers, friends, family members, and others. Within this Folio, you will tell the story of your educational journey and value of your personal Master’s experience as it applies to the labor market.

Remember, the Folio is your chance to show what you know and are able to do in the practice of teaching and learning with technology. You will submit a link to your Folio and attach your paper portion of the assignment in a Week Six discussion for preliminary feedback by peers and the instructor before the final submission. The earlier you submit in the Week Six discussion, the more opportunity you have for input from your peers and instructor to improve your work before the final submission of this assignment. Creating the Final Paper and Folio

Please include a link to the Folio within the paper portion of this assignment. As needed, refer to your Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) list (MACI, MAECEL, MAED, MASE, or MATLT). Then, create your final assignment to meet the content and written communication expectations below.

Paper For Above instruction

The content expectations for this final project are as follows:

  • Folio Components (5 Points): Include at least one artifact demonstrating mastery for each of your Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) (MACI, MAECEL, MASE, or MATLT).
  • Folio Design (3 Points): Design the Folio to be professional in appearance. Be sure to exemplify effective and ethical uses of technology so that the Folio is logically organized and visually appealing.
  • Narrative – Ranking (5 Points): In no more than one paragraph for each Program Learning Outcome, rank and discuss the importance of each PLO to your individual work setting, including an explanation of each ranking and its value to your learning environment or your position. Discuss how you currently use each PLO in your work setting and, if not used, how you might begin to incorporate them.
  • Narrative – Challenges and Solutions (5 Points): In no more than two paragraphs, discuss the design and development challenges experienced while creating the Folio and how these challenges were overcome.

Written communication expectations include:

  • Page Requirement (.5 points): One paragraph for each PLO, totaling two to three pages (excluding title and reference pages).
  • APA Formatting (.5 points): Use APA style consistently throughout the assignment.
  • Syntax and Mechanics (.5 points): Demonstrate meticulous comprehension and organization of spelling, grammar, and mechanics.
  • Source Requirement (.5 points): Reference three scholarly sources in addition to the course textbook, citing them correctly within the paper.

Review your assignment with the Grading Rubric to ensure all criteria are met before submitting it by Day 7. Focus on reflecting on your learning from EDU 696, analyzing how educational action research influences change, and demonstrating mastery of program learning outcomes through your Folio. This includes reviewing your previous coursework, redesign activities to showcase your competency, and reflecting insightfully on challenges faced during the creation of your Folio.

References

  • Phelps, P. H. (2008). Helping teachers become leaders. The Clearing House, 81(3). https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.81.3
  • American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
  • Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
  • Schmidt, H. G., & Moust, J. H. (2000). Processes of self-directed learning: a review of the literature. Medical Education, 34(1), 36-42.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: Different perspectives. Leadership, 4(3), 37-52.
  • Baker, R. S., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Roll, I. (2010). Developing a generalizable detecting-and-remediation framework for intelligent tutoring systems. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 20(3), 287-328.
  • Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Practicing online learning: Characteristics and criteria for success. Internet and Higher Education, 14, 3-9.
  • Resnick, M. (2017). Lifelong kindergarten: Cultivating creativity through projects, passion, peers, and play. MIT Press.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Related Assignments