Spring 2011, R546 (Bloomington and Indy via videoconferencing)
Instructional Strategies for Thinking, Collaboration, and Motivation
Course Web Site can be found at: http://www.indiana.edu/~bobweb/
HTML of Syllabus: http://curtbonk.com/Instructional-Strats-R546-2011.htm
Word Document: http://curtbonk.com/Instructional-Strats-R546-2011.doc
Dates: January 15th-March 5th, 2010 (8:00-1:00, Saturdays), IU-B, IUPUI
IU-Bloomington: Section 13868, School of Education: Room 2140
IUPUI: Section 25399, Educational Sciences (ES): Room 2101
Instructor: Curtis J. Bonk, Professor (he will rotate between IUB and IUPUI)
Instructional Systems Technology Dept.; Room 2238 Wright Education Building
Work Phone: (812) 856-8353; (812) 322-curt (2878) (cell); Home Fax: (812) 339-1254
E-mail: cjbonk@indiana.edu; Homepage: http://curtbonk.com/
Other instructor information: http://curtbonk.com/biolist.html
Course Description: Students in this course will learn how to develop learning environments that stimulate critical thinking and creativity, and that promote cooperative learning and motivation. To highlight method similarities and differences and to link theory to practice in each area, scientifically researched strategies and programs will be illustrated through hands-on activities.
Course History and Intended Audience:
Educators in all sectors are struggling with wave after wave of educational change. Many recognize the need for shifting their teaching philosophy to a more learner-centered or hands-on approach. However, they too often lack sufficient time and resources. In response, this course provides a roadmap or useful guide for those stuck in the murky swamp of paradigm change and educational reform. Different versions of this course have been taught since 1991, with videoconferencing added in 1996. Past course participants have also included graduate students, corporate trainers, instructional designers, administrators, and private consultants. This course is intended for:
Ø Anyone wanting to feel better prepared to teach.
Ø Graduate students looking to round out a doctoral or master's degree or minor in IST.
Ø Corporate trainers wanting to embed practical strategies into their training workshops and classes.
Ø Higher education professors wanting to enhance their instruction with innovative teaching.
Ø Instructional designers interested in embedding thinking skills into software and other media.
Ø K-12 principals and other administrators hoping to integrate various educational reform efforts.
Ø Practicing teachers searching for professional development opportunities for engaging learners.
Ø Private consultants offering thinking skill or problem solving workshops or training.
There are thousands of teachers, graduate students, parents, and corporate trainers in Indiana and elsewhere wanting to upgrade their pedagogical skills and knowledge related to student thinking and learning. At the same time, there are millions of bored and depressed learners who savor the brief moments when their instructors try something new. You can be such an innovative instructor!
Required Material: Bonk, C. J. (2011). Packet of Course Handouts. (available as a PDF document)
Highly Rec’d Texts: Gary A. Davis (2004). Creativity is Forever (5th Ed). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
Bonk, C. J., & Zhang, K. (2008). Empowering Online Learning: 100+ Activities for Reading, Reflecting, Displaying, and Doing. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Course Purpose and Approach:
Since the early 1980's, countless reports have detailed the shift toward an information-based economy and the need for a more technologically sophisticated workforce. A modern-day workforce clearly demands skills such as creativity, flexibility in thought, the ability to make decisions based upon incomplete information, complex pattern recognition abilities, and synthesis skills. With each advance in technology, there are renewed projections of increasingly higher skill levels needed to effectively function in society. Though most of these changes are occurring faster most of us can adapt, some institutions are starting to develop learning environments that stimulate and nurture critical and creative thinking as well as cooperative learning and student motivation to succeed. At the same time that educators have become aware of the importance of imagination, decision-making, and other higher-order thinking skills, business and industry leaders have cried out for flexible and creative employees who can look beyond the numbers.
In response to the emerging global marketplace, there has been a renewed interest in teaching and learning within public school and higher education settings as well as in military and corporate training environments. There has also been a parallel explosion in information about instructional practices and ways of delivering that information. No longer will people tolerate a curriculum that emphasizes the rote memorization of facts over problem solving and creativity. Instead, innovative instructors and trainers engage learners with more authentic and active learning experiences. Even with such renewed interest and resources, most teachers still lack the time and resources to adequately deal with the proliferation of instructional practices and associated ideas regarding educational change. The basic purpose of this course, therefore, is to attempt to fuse motivation and cooperative learning to thinking skill areas such as critical and creative thinking. The reason for this synthesis is to enable teachers, administrators, consultants, instructional designers, corporate trainers, and graduate students to sort through masses of information available on these topics and see some benefit within their personal and professional lives.
The books and activities selected will enable us to understand coinciding trends in education related to creative thinking, critical thinking, motivation, and cooperative learning. In starting on this path, specific techniques and ideas will be offered as well as implementation steps. Demonstrations and hands-on experiences of various methods will be used to highlight method similarities and differences. In addition, students will be exposed to ways to use technology to increase student thinking skills and teamwork. Finally, advice will be offered for getting started using these alternative instructional strategies.
Course Objectives:
As a result of this course, participants will:
· Understand the commonalities and differences of creative and critical thinking;
· Feel comfortable using dozens of motivational strategies and instructional techniques;
· List thinking skill options for different types of learners and content areas;
· Design innovative thinking skill activities as well as unique cooperative learning methods.
During the course, students will be expected to:
· Complete the required readings and actively participate in course activities;
· Write and reflect on the subject matter;
· Search for and share additional resources beyond the course materials provided;
· Develop and share their own curriculum materials and course plans.
Grading Scale: I will use a 90-80-70-60 scale based on 180 total points.
168 pts = A; 162 = A-; 156 = B+; 150 = B; 144 = B-; 138 = C+; 132 = C; 126 = C-
Topical Sequence:
Week 1. Jan 15th Motivation Theory and Motivational Techniques
Week 2. Jan 22rd Creative Thinking Defined and Explained (Read Davis 1-5 or comparable book)
Week 3. Jan 29th Creative Thinking Methods (Read Davis 5-10)
Week 4. Feb 5th Critical Thinking: Defined and Explained (Read Davis 11-13)
Week 5. Feb 12th Critical Thinking Methods (Read 2-4 chapters of new book) (Due: 2 from Task #2)
Week 6. Feb 19th Cooperative Learning Principles (Read 2-4 chapters of book selected)
Week 7. Feb 26th Coop Learning Methods: Generic & Specific (Read 2-4 chapters of book selected)
Week 8. March 5th Teaching with Technology Strategies (face-to-face, blended, online, and videoconferencing) & Bonk’s Top 100 Generic Strategies (i..e., the best of the best!) (Due: Final Presentations and third reflection paper from Task #2)
Note on readings for Weeks 5-8: During the second 4 weeks, students are to read two 2 additional books or one book and one special journal issue (these must be approved by the instructor). I want you to read books in critical thinking, creativity, cooperative learning, motivation, or problem solving. For doctoral students, at least one of these books should be research related. You pick the book(s) or journals. Some recommend books are listed below. I will bring many of these and others to class from the “Bonk Library.”
Sample of Other Books:
All Ages/General
1. Berk, R. A. (2002). Humor as an instructional defibrillator. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
2. Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1993). The Ideal Problem Solver (2nd ed.). NY: Freeman.
3. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow & psych of discovery & invention. Harper Collins.
4. de Bono, E. (2004). How to have a beautiful mind. Vermillion. (or Lateral Thinking from 1990).
5. Gardner, Howard (2008). 5 Minds for the Future. Harvard Business Press.
6. Heath, Chip & Dan (2008). Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive & Others Die. Random House
7. Medina, John (2008). Brain Rules: 12 Principles for Surviving & Thriving at Work, Home, School.
8. Michalko, M. (2006). Tinkertoys: A handbook of creative-think tech (2nd edition). Ten Speed Press.
9. Pink, Daniel (2006). A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers will Rule Future. Riverhead Bks.
10. Pink, Daniel (2009). Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Riverhead Books.
11. Robinson, Sir Ken (2009). The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything. Viking.
K-12 Books:
1. Baer, J. (1997). Creative teachers, creative students. Allyn & Bacon.
2. Bellanca & Fogarty (1991). Blueprints for Thinking in the Coop. Classroom, IRI/Skylight Pub.
3. Campbell, Campbell, & Dickinson (1999). Tchg & lnrg through mult intelligences. Allyn & Bacon.
4. Christensen, Clayton, Horn, M., & Johnson, C. (2008). Disrupting Class. McGraw-Hill.
5. Gibbs, J. (2001). Tribes: A new way of learning and being together. CenterSource Systems
6. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (2002). Circles of Learning, 5th ed. Interaction Book Co.
7. Kagan, S. (1997). Cooperative Learning. Kagan Cooperative Learning: www.kagan.online.com
8. Lambert & McCombs (1998). How students learn: Reforming schools thru lrnr-centered ed. APA.
9. McCombs, B. L., & Pope, J. E. (1994). Motivating hard to reach students. DC: APA.
10.McCombs B. & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school. Jossey-Bass.
11.Perkins, D. (1983). The Mind's Best Work: New Psych of Creative Thinking, Harvard Univ Press.
12.Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education (2nd Ed.). Prentice Hall.
13.Raffini, J.P. (1996). 150 ways to increase intrinsic motivation in the classroom. Allyn and Bacon.
14.Reeve, J. (1996). Motivating others: Nurturing inner motivational resources. Allyn and Bacon.
15.Starko, A. J. (1993). Creativity in the classroom: Schools of curious delight. Longman.
16.Stipek, D. (2001). Motivation to learn: Integ theory & practice (4th ed). Allyn & Bacon)
College Books:
1. Angelo & Cross (1993). Class Assessment Tech: Handbook for College Teachers (2nd ). Jossey-Bass.
2. Barkley, Cross, & Major (2005). Collab lrng tech: A Handbook for College Faculty. Jossey-Bass.
3. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass.
4. Davis, B. G. (1993).Tools for Teaching.Jossey-Bass. http://teaching.berkeley.edu/bgd/teaching.html
5. Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1998). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Class.
6. Roberts, T. (Ed.) (2004). Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Idea Publishing.
7. Salmon, G. (2003). e-tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan-Page.
8. Smith, Peter (2010). Harnessing America’s Wasted Talent: A New Ecology of Learning. Jossey-B.
9. Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. Jossey-Bass.
Corporate and Adult Training Books:
1. Epstein, R., with Rogers, J. (2001). The big book of motivation games. NY: McGraw-Hill.
2. Goldsmith, Marshall (2009). Mojo: How to Get it, How to Keep it, Get it Back…Hyperion.
3. Nelson, B. (2004). 1001 ways to reward employees. NY: Workman Publishing.
4. Scannell, E., E., & Newstrom, J. W. (1991). Still more games trainers play. McGraw-Hill.
5. Thiagi & Parker (1999). Teamwork & teamplay: Games & activ for bldg/trng teams. Jossey-Bass.
6. von Oech, Roger (2002). Expect the unexpected (or you won’t find it). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
=================================================
Class Activities: (I) Class Participation; (II) Reflection and Personal Exploration Activities; and (III) Final Project
I. Class participation and attendance (30 points). The instructor will note attendance and participation each week in this class.
II. Reflection and Personal Exploration Activity Options (90 Points--Pick any three):
Note: Most of the tasks below will be graded for coherence and organization (10 points); originality and generative learning (10 points); and completeness and thoroughness (10 points). Two tasks are due February 13th (Week 5 meeting) and the other is due March 6th (Week 8 meeting). Examples of some of these tasks may be placed at the Bobweb Web site.
Option A. Curriculum Brainstorm (30 points)
In this option, I want you to spend 1-3 hours all alone brainstorming (perhaps in a closet with a flashlight) all the possible ways you could use critical and creative thinking and motivational techniques and cooperative learning in your job setting (page 1). After we share some of your ideas in class, you will spend more time personally ranking these ideas and reconfiguring your original 3-4 lists. For example, you might sort your ideas into categories or prioritizations that are useful to you this coming year (page 2). Next, I want you to reflect and jot down notes on this list and how it changed (page 3—single spaced). On the Bobweb Web site are examples of good curriculum brainstorms from prior years. I will give feedback on this 3-4-page assignment related to your creative and insightful ideas, coherent and complete reflection, and practical relevance to this class and your future. (This option is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED for practicing or future teachers!)
Option B. Thought Paper (30 points)
The exploratory thought paper allows you to summarize some of the thinking you have been doing as a result of this class (e.g., the effects of thinking skills and cooperative learning on your life). Your thought piece will be a 2-4 page (single-spaced) exploration and explanation of a thinking skill, motivational strategy, or cooperative learning technique or idea that you have been contemplating. This is not mindless idea doodling, but, instead, is a way to coherently explore something that "inspires" you (at least temporarily). Your paper will be graded for (1) strong logic and relevance to class, (2) personal feelings/passion and exploration/quest to know more, and (3) creativity/unique thoughts and insight.
Option C. One Super Summary Search (30 points)
In the Super Summary Search, you might conduct a library search (preferably online) on a topic within motivation, critical thinking, creative thinking, or cooperative learning that you find important (this must include at least 10 articles (for doctoral students, at least half of these must be research-based articles). For instance, you might be interested in cooperative learning in K-12 classrooms; or, more specifically, cooperative learning in environmental science classrooms. If that is your topic, you would search through the research and practice literature on this topic (let's say for the past 3-5 years) and then create a personal bibliography on this topic for your later use. I would like for you to categorize the articles somehow (e.g., according to research or practice, task, age-groups, domain, time required, etc.). In addition, I would like for you to write a one paragraph summary for about 3-5 of these articles, wherein you summarize the article and discuss its importance to the field and to yourself and your colleagues. You will turn in the following items to me: (1) bibliography of the articles found listed in important categories/topics and (2) 4-5 brief summary abstracts. I will look for the following in your work: completeness and depth, relevancy to class and topic selected, and coherent analysis and categorization. Unless I ask, I do not need copies of any of the articles you select though you might include the first pages of every article.
Option D. Program or Strategy Review (30 points)
Find a method for teaching thinking skills, cooperative learning, or motivation, or a problem solving program or other heavily researched method (e.g., reciprocal teaching, cooperative scripts, etc.) and review or synthesize that approach and its applicability to learners who you currently or someday might teach. What flaws or limitations are apparent? What are the strengths or potential uses of the program? You might ask a teacher how he or she would actually use it in the classroom. You are to turn in a 2-4 page single-spaced review of this program or approach. These papers will be graded for (1) logic and organization, (2) completeness and depth, and (3) relevance and practicality.
Option E. Expert or Scholar Review (30 points)
Sometimes an instructional approach or thinking program is synonymous with the inventor or creator of that program. In this option, I want you to review the work of a scholar in this field. For instance, you might read about person who invented a popular instructional technique or series of techniques or who authored a famous book, such as Roger von Oech (http://www.creativethink.com/), Edward De Bono (http://www.edwdebono.com/), David Perkins, Barbara McCombs, or David or Roger Johnson from the Cooperative Learning Center (http://cehd.umn.edu/pubs/researchworks/coop-learning.html). You might send that person (or someone who has developed similar programs or strategies) a letter asking for additional information. For instance, you might want to see what else exists on a topic, find out how teachers are using a thinking skill program, write to competing researchers for research reports, or something similar. It is the exploratory, inquisitive nature of the task that is prized here, not what you actually do. In addition to orally reporting what you found out, you must turn in a 2-4 page single-spaced summary of the work of this person. Be sure to include what you did, why you chose this activity, what you gained from it, any resources received, and a copy of your letter(s). You might place an appendix in the paper outlining that person’s life.
Option F. Test or Instrument Review (30 points)
Instead of reviewing a program, scholar, or instructional technique, in this option, you are to find a test or instrument in an area related to this course (e.g., a creativity test, critical thinking test, motivational instructional, problem solving procedure, or cooperative learning index), and use it with at least one person and then critique it. If you cannot get a copy of the instrument, then you are to review the literature on the use of this tool or test and make recommendations for others who might want to employ it. You might also ask a teacher how he or she would use it in the classroom. Be sure to turn in a 2-4 page single-spaced report of the instrument along with an appendix of relevant contact information (address, price, age level, etc.) and examples of instrument items, if available. These papers will be graded for (1) logic and organization, (2) completeness and depth, and (3) relevance and practicality.
Option G. Book or Special Journal Issue Review (30 points)
In this option, you are to review a book or special issue of a journal related to this class (including one of the books you decide to read for Weeks 5-8). It can be a book or special issue that is practical, research-oriented, or theoretical. What are the key points or findings of the book or issue? What are the strengths and weaknesses? What are future trends? How will you apply some of the ideas from this book? You might decide to compare and contrast two books. An option of this would be to write a rebuttal to an existing review or critique as if you were the author. You should turn in a 2-4 page single-spaced review. These papers will be graded for (1) logic and organization, (2) completeness and depth, and (3) relevance and practicality.
Option H. Research Dig (30 points)
Unlike the Super Summary Search which also includes practical articles, in this option, you are to canvass the research literature on a topic related to this class. Perhaps this will lead to a dissertation, master’s theses, or research project. You must find at least 15 articles on a topic and read at least half of them. In your paper, you should describe how you found your articles and essentially describe the state of the research? What are the general findings? What are the strengths and weaknesses or limitations? Where are the open issues, questions, or gaps on this topic and how might you research this area? What are future trends? Also, how will you apply some of the ideas from this work? You should turn in a 2-4 page single-spaced review. This will be evaluated for logic and coherence, completeness/depth, and relevancy/practical.
Option I. Job Application Paper (30 Points)
Here, you are to write a 3 page single-spaced paper where you evaluate one or more perspectives, strategies, or approaches from the perspective of an educational setting, issue, or problem of importance to you (preferably your current or past job). For example, the paper might be titled, “My life as a cooperative learning teacher in a competitive classroom.” Like all good papers, it should have a descriptive title, some kind of thesis statement, and a conclusion. Since this is not a library research paper, you do not necessarily need to use any references resources other than the text and class discussion. These papers will be graded for (1) demonstration of understanding of the idea, strategy, or approach; (2) relevant application of it to some educational setting or context; (3) coherence and organization of the paper.
Option J. Case Situations or Problems (30 Points)
Here, you will write 3 case situations or vignettes related to your current or most recent job setting (each will be about one page long single spaced). In these cases, you will point out the situation or problem in 1-2 paragraphs as well as the key questions or issues. Next you will detail the concepts that relate to this class. Finally, you will provide a resolution based on your readings in this class. If anyone shares their cases with co-workers or peers and gets feedback on them, you will get 2 bonus points provided you attach this to your work. Your paper will be graded for (1) sound solution and overall demonstration of understanding of idea, strategy, perspective, or approach; (2) case richness and detail; (3) coherence and organization of the paper.
Option K. Bobweb or Other Similar Website Link Review (30 points)
Let’s use the Web site for the course! Here, you will explore, review, and critique the resources and key modules from the course Website, the Bobweb, or a similar site. You might explore each area to some degree--creative thinking, critical thinking, cooperative learning, and motivation--or go in depth on one area. In your 2-4 page single spaced paper, you are to point out the intended audience of the resource, the quality, depth, and currency of the resources, and the overall strengths and limitations. How might you suggest the site be improved? How might it be used in this particular class and in your own classes? How do the respective Web sites link together? What was especially intriguing or impressive about this Web site? Your review will be evaluated for coherence, completeness/depth, and relevancy. You might send your review to the Web site designers for their feedback.
III. Final Project Options (Pick one):
Master’s students I recommend Option A below and doc students I recommend Options B, C, or D.
Option A. Presentation/Description of Curriculum Unit or Idea (60 points: this can be team taught)
For master’s students, the key class assignment here is the development of a curriculum idea or unit on critical or creative thinking, motivation, or cooperative learning for a content area that you teach or would like to teach someday. Here, I want you to specify the materials to be learned/studied, targeted age group, learning objectives, instructional plan, time length, method(s) used and procedures, and anticipated assessment procedures (about 4-5 single spaced pages total). Note that the topic of this unit or lesson is up to you. I would ask that you present your curriculum ideas to the class with at least one class handout so that we all benefit from your efforts; the normal time allotment is 9-10 minutes for individuals and 15-18 minutes for teams. During your presentation, you can be as creative as you want to be.
Grading criteria for your curriculum unit presentation and paper include:
1. Organization of the presentation (flow, length, practiced).
2. Topic stimulation (active engagement).
3. Usefulness of materials (clear, practical, handy, relevant, informative, handout(s) provided).
4. Knowledge of the topic (expertise, good ideas, insights).
5. Scope of plans and curriculum impact (goals clear, important, appropriate, significant, doable).
6. Effort (digging deep, extensive depth displayed here, work-work-work-work, persistence).
Typically, presenters are provided with immediate feedback from other students as well as from me. I have collected tons of examples from previous years to share with you--see Bobweb Web site for some of these previous units. For many students, this assignment is typically the highlight of the course!
Option B. Research Proposal on Instructional Strategies
Doctoral students might focus more on research ideas and select Option B. For instance, you might conduct a pilot test of an instructional approach. Alternatively, you might observe and code the teaching techniques used by one instructor or a series of instructors. Or, you might observe a student “think aloud” as he uses a learning strategy or technique. Instead of that, you might perform action research in a course that you are teaching. For instance, you might try out a cooperative learning, or, more specifically, a cooperative reading technique like reciprocal teaching or cooperative scripts. Please turn in a maximum of 10 single-spaced pages, exclusive of references, appendices, chats, and tables.
Option B. Research Proposal:
I. Title Page (Name, affiliation, topic title, acknowledgments)
II. Review of the Literature
1. Intro to Topic/Problem (purpose, history, importance) (1 page)
2. Review of Literature (contrast relevant literature on the topic) (2-3 pages)
3. Statement of Hypotheses/Research Q's (what do you expect to occur) (1 page)
III. Method Section (2-3 pages)
1. Subjects and design (i.e., sample, who and how assigned to groups)
2. Materials/setting (i.e., hardware, software, text, models, figures)
3. Dependent measures/instruments (i.e., tests)
4. Procedure (i.e., training)
5. Other (i.e., coding, other materials)
6. Experimental analyses or comparisons
IV. Results and Discussion (OPTIONAL): 1. Antic/dummied results; 2. Discussion of results
V. References (APA style: see instructor for examples)
VI. Appendices (pictures, figures, graphs, instruments, charts, models, coding criteria, etc.)
Option C. Grant Proposal
Perhaps you are working for a center that needs grant money. Here is a chance to help out. After thoroughly reading a topic area, draft a proposal for a grant to a government agency or a foundation. You (and your boss) choose the funding agency, title, and monies needed. Include the purpose and goals, timeline for the project, ramifications or implications, budget, and other items required in the grant. An extensive literature review with associated research questions should ground your proposal, while the names and addresses of 3 reviewers and your resume should end your proposal. Please turn in a maximum of 10 single-spaced pages, exclusive of references, appendices, chats, and tables.
Option D. Center Creation Proposal
Write a proposal to create a teaching and learning center with a focus in an area wherein you are interested. This proposal can either be internal (i.e., written to a university, school district, or corporate training department) or external (i.e., written to a government agency or foundation). Include a rationale and purpose for center in your proposal as well as goals or targeted plans, a timeline, a budget, stakeholders, key players (make up names and bios if you want), space needed, resource needs, etc.). Please turn in a maximum of 10 single-spaced pages, exclusive of references, appendices, chats, and tables.
Grading Scale from Options B, C, or D (Note 1 (low) to 10 (high) for each of the following criteria):
1. Review of the Problem, Issue, and Literature (interesting, relevant, current, organized, thorough)
2. Relevancy (linked to content of the course, connections to course, fulfills task expectations)
3. Implications/Future Directions (important, generalizability, options available, research focus)
4. Overall Richness of Ideas (richness of information, elaboration, originality, uniqueness)
5. Overall Coherence (clarity, unity, organization, logical sequence, synthesis, style)
6. Overall Completeness (adequate info presented, fulfills task, no gaps/holes, precise, valid pts)
Option E. Web Site Update or Overall
The course Website, the Bobweb, was created in 1996 by Dr. Jamie Kirkley, a former student of this class. She and I hoped that the site would help future students of this class. Using grant money from the Continuing Studies Program, former student, Dr. Noriko Hara (now an IU Professor in SLIS), and I later expanded and refined it in 1997 and 1998, Dr. Gayle Dow and I updated the site from 2003-2007, Doug Moore updated it in 2008, Michael Bennett reshaped it in 2009, and I continue to do so. Nevertheless, it can always use additional contributions or updates to existing resources (e.g., a listing of creativity and critical thinking tests, an updated book listing, a new portal or resource, etc.). When done, you are to write a 1-2 page single spaced reflection paper on about your project and what you learned from it. Depending on the scope of the project, two people might work together here. See me for grading scale.