|Responsible unit:||Department of Informatics Engineering|
|Course/CS Responsible:||Master in Multimedia|
|Acronym||No. of Students||Study Plan||Curricular Years||Credits UCN||Credits ECTS||Contact hours||Total Time|
1 - GENERALITIES ABOUT THE TRIANGLE SOCIETY-EDUCATION-TECHNOLOGY
1.1 - (Re) thinking school with ICT: the new society, the new students and the new challenges of education
1.2 - Arrangements for computer use in education
1.3 - Major learning theories: behaviorism to connectivism
1.4 - Current usage panorama of ICT in education: national and international perspectives
2 - MULTIMEDIA MATRIX AND ITS EDUCATIONAL ASPECTS
2.1-Image and Animation
2.2-Audio and Video
2.3 Text and Graphics
2.4-Interface and Virtual Reality
3 - EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY IN FORMAL AND NON FORMAL CONTEXTS
3.1 - Web 2.0 and the new learning spaces (Learning Spaces)
3.2 - Informal and collaborative learning (in network) and self-regulated learning
3.3 - The school and mobile technologies
3.4 - Edutainment or "education" + "entertainment"
- Practice testing of Educational Software.
- Developing individual and group work.
- Oral presentation of work.
Some classes pieces will have a style admittedly "masterful" (in a good sense of the word) although it encourages student participation. Powerpoint presentations will be used as guidance for the students, but it resorts with great frequency to show simulations, digital games, dynamic pictures and other tools of virtual environment, as we shall see.
All texts, simulations and associated materials to the discipline are available to students in the associated e-learning platform. This virtual area empowers and "extends" the classroom, in space and time: forums continue conversations, texts extend readings, simulations can be re-visited, students documents can be shared.
A bibliographical list, available on paper but also in most cases, available digitally, it is offered to students. The classes will be very proactive, encouraging the students participation and, in some cases, becoming small workgroups. Students will have small projects and tasks assigned to them, they will they will develop either individually or in small groups. These studies will be submitted by uploading to a digital platform of the discipline and, some of them, presented orally. Paper versions will tend to be unused.
|Elaboração de projeto||80,00|
|Frequência das aulas||45,00|
2/3 attendance rate. Some absences may be compensated with virtual participations.
The evaluation will have continuous and formative components, combining flexible parameters with other more “conventional”, like a test. There will be moments of self and hetero-assessment in presentations of the undertaken tasks. Evaluations of the practical tasks depend on the work itself and the presentation. The task of participating in forums will be subject to critical evaluation of the teacher, with a statistical look at the frequency of posts (provided the platform backoffice) and a quality assessment of all inputs. In all cases, the activities of the students are typically buoyed by four criteria:
a) Scientific accuracy.
In addition to the tasks there will be a theoretical test relatively short, with a group of open questions (students choose two of a set of three). On a scale of 0 to 20, the final grade will have the following profile:
A - The continuous-formative assessment.
B - Evaluation of the execution and presentation of the performed tasks.
C - Final written test.
B -75% (25% for each unit tasks)
C - 20%
The final score for each student will be: 0,05 x A + 0,75 x B + 0,2 x C
As described by FEUP. Exceptions shall be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Without a final examination. Final mark can only be improved by re-attending the course in the following school year.
Almeida, A., Delicado, A., & Alves, N. (2011). As crianças e a internet em Portugal. Perfis de uso. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas, 65, 9-30.
Bennett, S. J., Maton, K. A. & Kervin, L. K. (2008). The 'digital natives' debate: a critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
Chen, W. (2015). A moveable feast: do mobile media technologies mobilize or normalize cultural participation? Human Communication Research, 41(1), 82-101.
Cranny-Francis, A. (2005). MultiMedia: texts and contexts. London: Sage Publications.
Dewey, J. (2002). A Escola e a sociedade e a criança e o currículo. Lisboa: Relógio d`Água.
Donnelly, D., McGarr, O., & O’Reilly, J. (2011). A framework for teachers’ integration of ICT into their classroom practice. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1469-1483.
Ebben, M., & Murphy, J. S. (2014) Unpacking MOOC scholarly discourse: a review of nascent MOOC scholarship. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(3), 328-345. doi:10.1080/17439884.2013.878352
Gere, C. (2008). Digital culture. London: Reaktion Books.
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review, 9, 47-64.
Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jonassen, D. H. (2007). Computadores, ferramentas cognitivas: desenvolver o pensamento crítico nas escolas. Porto: Porto Editora.
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
Kolikant, Y. B.-D. (2012). Using ICT for school purposes: Is there a student school disconnect? Computers & Education, 59(3), 907-914. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.012
Kovanovic՛, V., Joksimovic՛, S., Ga¨evic՛, D., Siemens, G., Hatala, M. (2015). British What public media reveals about MOOCs: A systematic analysis of news reports. Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 510–527. doi:10.1111/bjet.12277
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A dual level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In Alvermann, D.E., Unrau, N.J., & Ruddell, R.B. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed.) (pp. 1150-1181). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59, 1065-1078. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
Paiva, J. C., Morais, C., & Moreira, L. (2017). Activities with Parents on the Computer: an ecological framework. Journal of Education Technology & Society, 20(2), 1-14. http://www.ifets.info/download_pdf.php?j_id=76&a_id=1803
Paiva, J. C., Morais, C., & Moreira, L. (2015). O Multimédia no Ensino das Ciências: cinco anos de investigação e ensino em Portugal. Lisboa: Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos.
Paiva, J. C., Morais, C., Costa, L., & Pinheiro, L. (2016). The shift from “e-learning” to “learning”: Invisible technology and the dropping of the “e”. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 226-238. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12242.
Pereira, S., & Pereira, L. (2013). Digital media in primary schools: Literacy or technology? Analyzing government and media discourses. Educational Policy, 27(2).
Wallace, R. M. (2004). A Framework for Understanding Teaching With the Internet. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447-488.
Watkins, S. C. (2012). Digital Divide: Navigating the Digital Edge. International Journal of Learning & Media, 4(3-4), 1. doi:10.1162/IJLM_a_00072.