15 minutes of writing
I again looked at the microcommunities manuscript, and, again, was concerned about the personal perspective. So, I sent it off to Vicki and Joel for their feedback. Both concurred; it's too much of the first-person perspective. They provided excellent feedback and suggestions for new directions.
I don't think de-personalizing the manuscript will be terribly difficult, but I'd prefer to finish with the assessment paper before continuing on this one.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
This is a Public School?, 2/14/10
20 minutes of writing
I revisited the "This is a Public School?" paper and really like it a lot... But, it's so personal/first person perspective that I worry it might not appeal to a Kappan audience. I sent it to Char with a request for edits and she provided some great feedback (which I have yet to integrate into the paper).
I revisited the "This is a Public School?" paper and really like it a lot... But, it's so personal/first person perspective that I worry it might not appeal to a Kappan audience. I sent it to Char with a request for edits and she provided some great feedback (which I have yet to integrate into the paper).
Assessment Paper, 2/12/10
22 minutes of writing
I worked on editing the rest of the assessment paper and there were only small changes to make. Char provided me with editorial suggestions and I hope to hear Steve's recommended editorial remarks within the next few days.
I worked on editing the rest of the assessment paper and there were only small changes to make. Char provided me with editorial suggestions and I hope to hear Steve's recommended editorial remarks within the next few days.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Assessment Paper, 2/7/10
30 minutes of writing
I edited the beginning through the literature review of the assessment paper. The section needs greater cohesion, but I'm not sure how to do that. I'm getting happier with the dates of the citations, but this is also a concern (particularly given that the first citation in the introduction is from 1996.
Being accountable to my writing with Char has been very beneficial. I've written more this week than I have in a long time. I hope to keep up even this minor improvement.
I edited the beginning through the literature review of the assessment paper. The section needs greater cohesion, but I'm not sure how to do that. I'm getting happier with the dates of the citations, but this is also a concern (particularly given that the first citation in the introduction is from 1996.
Being accountable to my writing with Char has been very beneficial. I've written more this week than I have in a long time. I hope to keep up even this minor improvement.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Assessment Paper, 2/3/10
110 minutes of writing
Thanks to Char, I'm trying to get back on the "writing horse." Steve has also worked hard to motivate me to finish the literature review for the assessment paper so we can get it back under review.
In reviewing the literature review, I saw that there was no discussion of the exciting work being done at Harvard with emerging technologies. I also couldn't avoid adding in some mention of the Gee and Squires work on digital gaming in educational environments.
I have not re-worked the entire section, but did add a significant portion to the end of the literature review. I think this makes the paper much stronger.
Next, I need to review the entire paper (it might need some updating in regard to citations), and, again, get it ready and send it out for review.
Thanks to Char, I'm trying to get back on the "writing horse." Steve has also worked hard to motivate me to finish the literature review for the assessment paper so we can get it back under review.
In reviewing the literature review, I saw that there was no discussion of the exciting work being done at Harvard with emerging technologies. I also couldn't avoid adding in some mention of the Gee and Squires work on digital gaming in educational environments.
I have not re-worked the entire section, but did add a significant portion to the end of the literature review. I think this makes the paper much stronger.
Next, I need to review the entire paper (it might need some updating in regard to citations), and, again, get it ready and send it out for review.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Virtual Museums, 10/28/09
44 minutes of writing
I began outlining and pseudo-writing the virtual museums L&L article co-authored with Greg Telhorster. I have been quite remiss at working on this article and it is time to begin buckling down and working fastidiously. I plan to email Greg (with a cc to Diane Heitzenrater) as soon as possible with the work I've done. As soon as he and I approve a final outline, I would like to write my portion within a few days.
I began outlining and pseudo-writing the virtual museums L&L article co-authored with Greg Telhorster. I have been quite remiss at working on this article and it is time to begin buckling down and working fastidiously. I plan to email Greg (with a cc to Diane Heitzenrater) as soon as possible with the work I've done. As soon as he and I approve a final outline, I would like to write my portion within a few days.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Microcommunities, 7/22/09
75 minutes of writing
In preparing an AERA proposal for 2010 (Denver), I worked on developing the beginnings of a paper on the microcommunities research. I combined information from the IRB protocol with the paper I began writing: "This is a Public School?" The proposal is quite poor and I do not believe it will be accepted, but it really peaked my interest in finishing "This is a Public School" as a paper for the Kappan.
I do hope the proposal is accepted because I feel indebted to the people from Garehime for the generous gift of their time. I need to get their ideas on paper to be shared with a wide audience. They deserve it and other schools need to know that the possibility of a truly dynamic, citizenship-based program is available for their use.
In preparing an AERA proposal for 2010 (Denver), I worked on developing the beginnings of a paper on the microcommunities research. I combined information from the IRB protocol with the paper I began writing: "This is a Public School?" The proposal is quite poor and I do not believe it will be accepted, but it really peaked my interest in finishing "This is a Public School" as a paper for the Kappan.
I do hope the proposal is accepted because I feel indebted to the people from Garehime for the generous gift of their time. I need to get their ideas on paper to be shared with a wide audience. They deserve it and other schools need to know that the possibility of a truly dynamic, citizenship-based program is available for their use.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Sped Law Paper, 5/26/09
25 minutes of writing
I edited the SpEd Law paper. There's a lot of good writing and information in the paper, but it still lacks a cohesive structure that makes a bold point. I've requested content editing by Dr. McCord and he's said he would do it as soon as he finishes his summer teaching.
I edited the SpEd Law paper. There's a lot of good writing and information in the paper, but it still lacks a cohesive structure that makes a bold point. I've requested content editing by Dr. McCord and he's said he would do it as soon as he finishes his summer teaching.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Sped Law Paper, 5/1/09
360 minutes of writing
I spent the day completely focused on the SpEd Law paper and was able to complete a first full draft. In addition to bringing in the new references (and finding another gem to add to the collection), I was able to identify some related case law. I worked on the section on UDL and the conclusion, but neither make the point I wish to make to my liking. I need a much stronger ending and probably need to change my conclusion to a "Stakeholders" section, expand that section, and write a separate conclusion. I also need to make my UDL section much more relevant to my topic of law. Basically, I currently have a lot of good, but disjointed work.
I've submitted the manuscript to Bob McCord for his review. I hope he will be able to offer a lot of guidance for improvement. I just want to be done with this paper. I would LOVE to finally catch up with my "almost ready to go in the outbox" box.
I spent the day completely focused on the SpEd Law paper and was able to complete a first full draft. In addition to bringing in the new references (and finding another gem to add to the collection), I was able to identify some related case law. I worked on the section on UDL and the conclusion, but neither make the point I wish to make to my liking. I need a much stronger ending and probably need to change my conclusion to a "Stakeholders" section, expand that section, and write a separate conclusion. I also need to make my UDL section much more relevant to my topic of law. Basically, I currently have a lot of good, but disjointed work.
I've submitted the manuscript to Bob McCord for his review. I hope he will be able to offer a lot of guidance for improvement. I just want to be done with this paper. I would LOVE to finally catch up with my "almost ready to go in the outbox" box.
Sped Law Paper, 4/30/09
45 minutes of writing
I began delving back into the research for the SpEd Law paper. In addition to the articles I authored on the topic, I found three other recent gems from JSET. I began editing the paper to include these pieces and to improve the text already in existence.
I began delving back into the research for the SpEd Law paper. In addition to the articles I authored on the topic, I found three other recent gems from JSET. I began editing the paper to include these pieces and to improve the text already in existence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)