Final Paper / Arts Based Project (50 marks)

This final paper/project is the culminating assignment for the course. For this assignment, you will choose a topic that critically examines the use of technology in the arts and humanities. Often students have found it helpful to focus on the context in which they teach. The final paper is divided into different parts that will be submitted and evaluated throughout the course: Statement of the topic, Outline, Articles Annotation and Critique / Literature Review, Final Paper/Project ,and Collaborative Peer Review.

Statement of the topic, Research Outline

At the end of Week 6, email your topic and a short paragraph to the instructor. You will receive feedback by week 7.

By the end of Week 7, post the topic for your final paper and a short 500 hundred-word paragraph or equivalent that provides some details about the topic. Post topic in the designated discussion forum. That will provide other students with the opportunity to share with you any resources that they may have about your topic. You are encouraged to review all the topics and do the same.

Articles Annotation and Critique / Literature Review (Pass/fail) (week 9)

By the end of week 9 you will need to have searched online and in libraries for information (5-7 articles) that will enhance your discussion of the topic. The articles that you will find, read and annotate will help clarify key terms, theories, or the context so that your own Starting with an annotated bibliography of the articles you read. After annotating the articles that you chose you will prepare a literature review.

For further information on annotating bibliography see: Delamont, Sara. (1992). Some guidelines for finding and recording literature. In Fieldwork in educational settings: Methods, pitfalls and perspectives (pp. 17-22). London: The Falmer Press).

When you annotate follow the next steps and answer these questions:

Full bibliographic details (authors, complete title, date of publication, publisher and place, name of journal, page numbers, library catalogue #, ISBN, URL for on-line publications)

As you annotate each article consider the following points:

• What are the key points in the article? Or one point that you want to focus on if it is a very long article.
• How do these points relate to other course readings? To your topic?
• What are your points of agreement and disagreement with the claims made in the paper?
• What view(s) of technology, teaching and learning, are being elaborated here? What evidence is used to support these views?
• Do the author’s views resonate with, contradict, or relate to any of your experiences in the classroom? In what ways?
• What is the significance of the article you read as you consider technology, arts and humanities and your topic?

After the annotation you will be ready to write the literature review. Remember, a literature review is NOT just a summary of the articles that you have read. It is a discussion of key ideas, issues and themes in the field you are exploring in your paper. The literature review provides the reader with the theoretical context and it situates your paper in a larger body of research in the field. It is a thorough and sophisticated review of the literature – where you identify terms, locate literature, check relevance, organize what you have selected to include and then write the review. In the literature review you will critically examine your topic as you consider the course readings and discussions as well as the articles that you have annotated earlier. You will also define the need and significance for your own study within the existing body of research.

By Tuesday of Week 10, the literature review and the annotated bibliography are due (Assignment Drop Box).

For more information about a literature review:

http://library.concordia.ca/help/howto/litreview.php

Boote, David and Beile Penny. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher 34 (6) 3-15 (also available on line)

Criteria for evaluating the Articles Critique / Literature Review

• Includes title of the Final Paper/Project.
• Includes bibliographic details for each article using APA style

For more information about APA Style:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

• Includes the annotation of each article using questions above
• Includes an analysis/synthesis/critique of all the articles chosen for the literature review. In the literature review you will critically analyze the articles and relate them to your topic and the question you pose in the final paper. This is the most significant section in the Articles Critique /Literature Review.

Collaborative Peer Review (Pass/fail)

Learning occurs within communities of inquiry. Throughout the course you will have the opportunity to collaborate with your fellow course members to critique and edit your writing before submitting the final version to the instructor for evaluation. This is an opportunity for you to obtain valuable feedback on your writing from your peers. We will use the same process for your final paper/project.

As a peer editor you will receive the paper (or material such as concept papers/web sites/i-movies/poetry/photographs/ etc. for arts based projects) by email (Week 11), you will read it and provide written feedback to the author (emailed by the end of week 12).

You will provide feedback both throughout the document using tracking as well as a summary of your feedback either at the beginning or end of the document.

When you provide feedback consider the following points:

• Read the complete piece
• Comment (in writing both throughout the paper and in the summary) about the flow of ideas – coherence and logic within the argument
• Identify the main message
• Comment about the connections between the argument and the quotes
• Highlight the parts that are most powerful, engaging and significant
• Is there any part that can be cut from the piece?
• Is there a part that is flat, needs clarification or is confusing?
• Note language choices and grammar
• End the summary with some editorial suggestions

Consider using the voice tool for a discussion of the feedback.

Email your written feedback to the author and use Assignment Drop Box to submit to Instructor. Use tracking so that it is easy to see the comments within the text, as well as a summary at the end or beginning of the document. Written feedback should be sent to the author by the end of week 12.

Final Paper Or Arts Based Project (50 marks)

For this assignment, you will choose a topic that critically examines the use of technology in the arts and humanities. Often students have found it helpful to focus on the context in which they teach. Taking your environmental context into consideration and the literature review that you have completed and based on observations, conversations and course readings and discussions you could choose to write through text, photography, dance, performative inquiry, visual transformation or other manipulated technological means:

1. a) To analyze the ways in which technology is integrated into your context.
2. b) To propose a new vision of integrating technology into your context.

Whatever your choice you will have to address the following questions:

1. How is technology currently integrated in your context?
2. What are the particular challenges and barriers to change in your context regarding the use of technology?
3. How can these challenges and barriers be addressed?

The final paper should be 7-8 pages or equivalent (about 2500 words or equivalent + references).

You may choose to do this paper with a partner in the class who shares a similar vision or is grappling with similar challenges. This means that your combined efforts must be greater than one individual’s submission.

The final paper is due at the end of week 13.

Optional

You may propose a final project that will better suit your goals for the course. In order to complete this option you will have to discuss your proposal with the instructor early in the course.

Source: ETEC532 Syllabus – 2013

References