Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 51

Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris

Student No: 14217904


Kyklaminon 5, 2322, Lakatamia, Lefkosia, CYPRUS

apolis@cytanet.com.cy

Principles and Practices of Online Learning, edu932j1x

Action Research

27th May 2005

Planning for change

Lecturers:
Celia O’ Hagan and Michelle Devlin
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

I would really like to welcome you on board!!

I am thrilled this course is finally setting to explore the benefits of online learning.

I am happy we are on this together!

Do not forget to use the messenger service for contact and individualised support

Polis Aniftos

The work produced for this course is currently displayed on the following address and is being accessed by my secondary targeted
audience. Some changes were made (e.g. dictionary with electronics terms in Greek) to allow for better access:

Arrangements have been made to have the site linked to by other websites, such as the World Association of Technology
Teachers (W.A.T.T), dataSCAN gateway (Techitout sister site), and Technology teachers association in Cyprus.

It also participates to the European the ELearningAwards 2005

2
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

http://www.technognosia.org.uk

3
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

Abstract from MT session webpage

Figure 1
2
: Abstract from webpage designed

4
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

5
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

Table of Contents
Abstract from MT session webpage..........................................................................................4
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................6

TASK 1..................................................................................................................................11

STAGE 1: ...................................................................................................................................11
IDENTIFICATION, EVALUATION AND FORMULATION OF THE PROBLEM.....................................................11
IDENTIFYING AN ISSUE, OR A PROBLEM..............................................................................................12
RECONNAISSANCE .........................................................................................................................12
Describing the facts of the situation/ explaining the facts of the situation..............................12
CONSTRUCTING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR ACTION.................................................................................13
Problems identified:................................................................................................................13
Issues to be considered: .........................................................................................................13
Constraints (challenges):.........................................................................................................14
Advantages:............................................................................................................................14
Action research (AR) objectives (criteria of success):............................................................14

TASK 2..................................................................................................................................15

STAGE 2: ...................................................................................................................................15
DISCUSSION, INITIAL RESEARCH, PLAN OF ACTION, NEGOTIATION WITH PARTIES INVOLVED.........................15
INITIAL RESEARCH.........................................................................................................................16
Plan of action..........................................................................................................................16
Negotiation with parties involved...........................................................................................16
Causing interactions................................................................................................................16
STAGE 3: ...................................................................................................................................17
REVIEW OF LITERATURE.................................................................................................................17
INVESTIGATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING TO THE STUDENTS PRACTICE..........................................18
The theories of how we learn..................................................................................................18
The relevancy of subject and teaching strategies....................................................................20
IDENTIFICATION OF CURRICULUM DESIGN ISSUES ONLINE.......................................................................21
Creativity is a central aim in the d&t course...........................................................................21
THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER; 3/1/2005; HARRISON, HENRY L., III: THE CREATED ENVIRONMENT: AN
ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION TEACHERS: CREATIVITY DOESN'T JUST HAPPEN BY CHANCE;
THE PREPARED ENVIRONMENT NOURISHES IT. .....................................................................................21
Models of online instruction...................................................................................................21
PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING RELATED TO E-LEARNING.............................................................................24
STAGE 4: ...................................................................................................................................25
REDEFINING ORIGINAL “PROBLEM”..................................................................................................25
REFINED HYPOTHESIS....................................................................................................................26

REFLECTION......................................................................................................................27

STAGE 5: ...................................................................................................................................27
SELECTION OF RESEARCH PROCEDURES............................................................................................27
A CRITIQUE OF METHODOLOGIES......................................................................................................28
On method of current teaching and learning...........................................................................28
On method of online teaching and learning............................................................................28
On sampling............................................................................................................................28
On choice of materials (curriculum planning).........................................................................28

6
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

EVALUATION REPORT....................................................................................................30

STAGE 6:....................................................................................................................................30
IDENTIFICATION OF THE EVALUATION PROCEDURES TO BE USED.............................................................30
EVALUATION OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................31
Time plan................................................................................................................................31

TASK 3..................................................................................................................................32

STAGE 7: ...................................................................................................................................32
IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING OF THE ACTION PLAN....................................................................32
ONLINE TEACHING........................................................................................................................33
MONITORING METHOD....................................................................................................................33
MONITORING FREQUENCY...............................................................................................................33

EVALUATION REPORT....................................................................................................34

STAGE 8:....................................................................................................................................34
INTERPRETATION OF DATA AND EVALUATION......................................................................................34
EVALUATION BY MY TUTOR.............................................................................................................35
EVALUATION BY THE STUDENTS AT UU............................................................................................35
EVALUATION BY MY STUDENTS AND PEERS AT GYMNASIO DROSHIAS ....................................................35
SELF EVALUATION. EVALUATION AGAINST SUCCESS CRITERIA SET IORIGINALLY........................................36
WHAT WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE NEXT CYCLE OF AR.....................................................................37

BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................38

THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER; 3/1/2005; HARRISON, HENRY L., III: THE CREATED ENVIRONMENT: AN
ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION TEACHERS: CREATIVITY DOESN'T JUST HAPPEN BY CHANCE;
THE PREPARED ENVIRONMENT NOURISHES IT. .....................................................................................38

JONASSEN, MCALEESE & DUFFY’S (1993), CONITNUUM OF KNOWLEDGE


ACQUISITION MODEL.....................................................................................................38

APPENDICES.......................................................................................................................39

APPENDIX 1.................................................................................................................................40
APPENDIX 2.................................................................................................................................41
ACTION PLAN (RELATED TO TASK 2 AND THE REFLECTIVE JOURNAL)..................................................41
Initial Steps to follow:.............................................................................................................41
To cause interactions:.............................................................................................................41
APPENDIX 3 (RELATED TO REFLECTIVE JOURNAL).........................................................................43
APPENDIX 4.................................................................................................................................44
APPENDIX 5.................................................................................................................................45
APPENDIX 6 ................................................................................................................................46
APPENDIX 7.................................................................................................................................49
From evaluation log: ..............................................................................................................50

7
edu932j1x. Action Research Report, Evaluation Report and Reflective Journal. Polycarpos Aniftos- Gregoris,

Label:

Task 1: Blue Grey


Task 2: Plum
Task 3: Violet
Reflective comments: Teal
Evaluation: Brown
Original ideas: Green
Other text: Black

8
The Action Research
Task 1
Stage 1:

Identification, Evaluation and Formulation of the


Problem
Identifying an issue, or a problem
I teach Design and Technology (D&T) at key stage 3. Year 9 students’ syllabus is dedicated
to electronics. The first problem is that they only have an exercise book but do not have a
textbook. Whatever material is appropriate for reading, in order to support their learning, I
have to prepare it by myself. In addition to this, I have been advised by the subject inspector’s
counselor to be more ‘practical’ in my teaching, for this is the new approach to teaching our
subject. This means that students are required to be more actively involved during the lesson;
and that I devote less time to cover theory.

Reconnaissance

Describing the facts of the situation/ explaining the facts of the situation

This advice originally sounds fair and reasonable, but when considering that more theory is
required by the syllabus and the curriculum of this course, from behalf of the time
requirements, than skill acquisition then you realize that more time should be devoted to
studying and comprehension exercises than application, design or practical work.

Current teaching and learning strategies employed:


In addition to this, it is widely assumed by students and parents that this subject should be
more practical than theoretical, and the students soon enough become less motivated to
engage into activities that involve less practical work than expected and more theory and
knowledge acquisition. Yet, I, as a teacher, must not give in to the pressure, because the
curriculum is the A-Z for what I should teach, provided I have the time, (or not?). A different
teaching approach, e.g. Active learning, Group work – or Cooperative Learning etc, could
solve this problem.

On the other hand, grade “A” students who are usually more theoretically oriented, usually
achieve poorly in D&T because they do not have the necessary kinesthetic intelligence or
making skills to produce fine artifacts, than below average students often do. They should
better be off with theory. In this group, according to bibliography, belong a larger percentage
of girls, which makes them a disadvantaged group with regards to the subject’s objectives.

Current curriculum techniques:


The truth about the curriculum is that, its designers, being aware of this situation, have
planned so that it is gradually being adjusted to have a dual nature, in order to achieve
balance between theory and practice; and the teacher is thus required to provide a dual
approach in his own teaching and delivery of the lesson: theoretical for the first half of the
year and a more practical within the second and third term. It would be ideal, by implementing
web supported learning, to integrate theory and practical work throughout the year.
Constructing the general plan for action1

Combining the two problems explained above, my work through this research, will involve the
design for an online curriculum to cover the theoretical part of the subject for the next half of
the year and provide reading material to support primarily grade “A” students, and girls that
may not be so much interested in practical work. This way, the dual mode of the subject will
be implemented inside and outside the premises of the school, in the cyberspace and in the
workshop. A number of students will gain the required knowledge through online delivery
while the remainder practical work will take place in the workshop with all the students, thus
freeing my time in the classroom for supervision. This way the curriculum will be covered, and
in surplus: collaborative learning through practical work and online learning will be employed,
active involvement of students is more applicable, as suggested by the inspector’s counselor,
and above all, differentiation will be facilitated promoting equality above equity.

Problems identified:

• No reading books
• Students should be more actively involved
• Curriculum provides more time for theory than practical work
• Curriculum requires a dual mode of teaching, switching between practice and theory
• High performers are unmotivated to do practical work (theory oriented, and more girls
than boys)
• Poor performers are unmotivated for theory and knowledge acquisition and prefer
practical work

Issues to be considered:

• Limited access to the WWW. The technologically restricted. The prolongation of the
disadvantaged groups.
• Provision for disabled students in online instruction
• Learning styles of students
• Motivation
• Time limitations (for online design and delivery, students’ time required for online
learning)
• Depth and breadth of knowledge
• Differentiation and progression within the online module
• Funding for website hosting
• Maintenance of the website
• Students’ online Assessment and feedback
• Evaluation of the course and the whole AR project

1
Appendix 2
• Material to be reused
• Keep all informed
• Keep students involved, stimulated and motivated
• Make it a successful example for promoting online learning

Constraints (challenges):

• Students/ parents may find it too demanding


• School administration should be informed for support, funding and suggestions
• Subject inspector should be informed. Support welcomed.
• Material for online delivery should be soon identified, negotiated with all parties
involved (students, subject inspector)
• Maintain manageability and controllability (a classroom issue turns out to have too
many involved that may provide obstacles)

Advantages:

• Important to the students. All advantaged, in contrast to current situation.


• Of major importance to me. Many problems solved through this work. A challenge for
a pioneering work, that may become appreciated by those involved in initial steps.
• Important for the subject as a pilot work for web supported delivery that is pioneer, so
far.

• A major step for the school for providing web supported learning.
The above problems may be resolved by considering web supported instruction:

Action research (AR) objectives (criteria of success):

• To provide for web supported learning2

• That involves most students

• That motivates all students

• That actively engages all students

• That uses teacher time effectively (reading material should be prepared anyway)
• That complies with subject inspector’s recommendations
• That adds to the curriculum and uses it more effectively
• That allows for collaborative learning
• That provides for differentiation and progression
• That is reusable and re-purposeful
• That is manageable and controllable
• That is interactive and flexible

2
Assigned specifically appropriate learning opportunities for each objective of this research; e.g. chat,
threaded discussions, whiteboard etc are shown in Appendix 1
Task 2
Stage 2:
Discussion, initial research, plan of action,
negotiation with parties involved
Initial Research

Plan of action3

Negotiation with parties involved4


All comments were positive and I was encouraged to proceed

Causing interactions5

Interactions are invisible. Their effects are demonstrated in peoples’ behaviour. I had noticed a
better attitude from the students and the management of the school towards me. Questions
concerning my project arose and “how I was doing”. I believe I have more support from and better
relationships with my colleagues. The management showed their support by allowing me some
extra time to work at home for the completion of my assignment.

3
Appendix 2
4
Appendix 3
5
Appendix 4
Stage 3:
Review of Literature
Investigation of the principles of learning to the students practice

The theories of how we learn

Bloom’s learning domains


Based on my current curriculum experience, through the lessons, learners should
demonstrate an advancement of learning based on Bloom’s taxonomy. So an effort was
made to provide the framework for this:

• The session was divided6 in “novice” (lesson 1), “advanced” (lesson 2) and “expert”
(lesson 3) level in a relative sense.

• Then the online learning activities were listed7 and a selection was attempted
identifying/ matching the activities with the proposed learning domain. This attempt
was not based on scientific evidence but I used my experience and intuition, always
based on my own experience
Blending of the theories of Bloom and Steinberg was a creative and enjoyable task,
leading to the realisation that the scale that refers to the domains of learning also refers to
expert levels and with regards to learners’ characteristics, autonomy, approaches,
delivery methods and tasks. Thus Netskills’ lecture image below:

Figure 3: Netskill's blending of learners' characteristics, autonomy of learning, approaches and


delivery methods

6
Based on Jonassen, McAleese & Duffy’s (1993), Conitnuum of Knowledge Acquisition Model
7
Appendix 5
Could be modified as follows8:

Figure 4: My adaptation of the previous figure. I have assigned tasks


to the lessons related to their taxonomic value.

The learning styles


Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences have not been widely considered in online learning. Yet
Kemalatha et al discuss their application with interesting findings; their survey indicates that
“students with visual/spatial and interpersonal intelligences use and benefit more from online
learning and prefer them to traditional instructional strategies techniques when compared with
students whose intelligences are verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematical, bodily kinesthetic and
intrapersonal. Furthermore, the findings show that some online activities appear to be generic
across all applications”. Therefore I have planned for use of online activities that apply for most
types of learners, such as video conferencing and scaffolding activities. Perhaps in a future
application of the course a questionnaire which explores these characteristics of the learners
could be employed a priory to suggest method of teaching (web-supported or classroom
based).

The affects of the environment


All interested parties (school’s inspector, head teacher, students and parents) had approved
my decision for online revision at the end of the year. Students had expressed their concerns
for assessment and some of them for the lack of internet connection. A few stressed out that
they do not have the necessary computer and internet skills.
Recent innovations to Cypriot schools have promoted technology in many areas.
Unfortunately the d&t department is one of the last to accept these changes. No internet
connection is available and the PCs in the workshop are outdated. In a school wide research I
have found that 90% of year 7 students have the required skills and computer/ connection/

8
Indicative graphical representation of the breadth of learning objectives (levels of learning) of my MT
session with respect to learner’s characteristics, autonomy, approaches, delivery methods and tasks.
equipment to handle the material while 70% of year 9 students (secondary target audience)
are in the same position. Therefore to ensure equality of opportunity the material has to be
provided also in a CD package for each student and be installed in workshop’s PCs. For the
time being the alternative of emancipative participation in this pilot course was chosen; while
permission had been obtained for the students to use the computer lab.

Motivation

The relevancy of subject and teaching strategies


ATHERTON J S (2003)9 discusses the nature of motivation and judges Maslow in a unique
way; arguing that his hierarchy of needs is a model that restricts its end in its own being: by
setting a pre-requisition the satisfaction of physiological needs prevents altruism and
promotes individuality which imprisons the person below the level of self-actualisation of

which, altruism is a condition. He favours Herzberg’s “motivational hygiene model” (Herzberg

196610) seen diagrammatically below:

Figure 5: Herzberg's Motivational Hygiene Model


Far from appealing designs, accessibility and skills issues are some factors that may not
encourage students from the very beginning and drop the course. Also tutors engagement is
central and attitude towards students in learning chats or discussions. All these factors were
carefully considered.

9
ATHERTON J S (2003) Learning and Teaching: Motivation to Learn (inc. Maslow) [On-line] UK:
Available: http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/motivlrn.htm Accessed: 4 March 2005
10
HERZBERG F (1966) Work and the Nature of Man Cleveland: World Publishing Company
Identification of curriculum design issues online
Kathleen T. Brinko’s11 questions concerning the design of a course are adequate to apply
when designing online activities, once you consider in addition, accessibility, usability and re-
usability related issues

Creativity is a central aim in the d&t course


Teaching design and technology (d&t) is profoundly concerned with nurturing creativity.
Harrison, Henry L., III12 writes:
“Creativity is foundational to the development of technology.”
And as Knight 2002:1 describes it:
“Creativity constructs new tools and new outcomes – new embodiments of knowledge
It constructs new relationships, rules, communities of practice and new connections – new social
practices”

An analogy to the informed professional, in the d&t practice, would be a creative d&t teacher.
And a successful student (future designer or technologist) is the one who manages to design
and build original products using his creativity; because, as Norman Jackson13 from LTSN
puts it:
“Enabling students to be creative is a worthwhile and desirable goal for higher education and any
programme can be vivified to make it more favourable to fostering creativity”
So, when teaching d&t our effort as teachers is to preserve our goals on enhancing creativity
while focusing on the different areas of the curriculum.
Thus spoken, it has been my overall aim during this assignment to establish a framework for
promoting creativity through a creative curriculum design.

Models of online instruction


There are several models for designing online instruction. Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou14
categorises them in “Classroom”, “Product” and “System” instructional design models15:

1. Heinich, Molenda, Russell & Smaldino (Heinich et al, 2002) is a representative model
of the first category, where selection of materials is more likely than content
development:

11
Kathleen T. Brinko, Appalachian State University: Envisioning Your Course: Questions to Ask as
You Design Your Course , derived from: http://www.irc.uci.edu/trg/28.html [online], accessed:
24/5/2005. Source: The Teaching Professor, February 1991
12
The Technology Teacher; 3/1/2005; Harrison, Henry L., III: The created environment: an
assessment tool for technology education teachers: creativity doesn't just happen by chance;
the prepared environment nourishes it.
13
Norman Jackson, ltsn generic centre (Learning and Teaching Support Netwrok: Designing for
Creativity: A Curriculum Guide
14
All three figures provided in the next page are cited in Kyriaki’s Anagnostopoulou: Designing to
Learn and Learning to Design: an overview of instructional design models (2002). LTSN generic
netwrk.UK
15
Gustafson et al, 1997
Figure 6: Heinich, Molenda, Russell & Smaldino (Heinich et al, 2002)

2. Following Bergman and Moore’s (1990 cited in Gustafson et al, 1997) Product
category, as a sole purpose production (that cannot be the product of modification of
existing materials) aimed to be reusable by many instructional providers:

Figure 7: Bergman and Moore (1990 cited in Gustafson et al, 1997)

3. Finally, Dick and Carey’s (1978 cited Joliffee et al, 2001, p60) which is formed by a
team of professionals whose task is the design of a whole course curriculum. All
these models apply the same methodology of the ADDIE approach, in an either
cyclical, spiral or linear procedure:

Figure 8: Dick and Carey (1978 cited Joliffee et al, 2001, p60)
Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou suggests that prior to selection of any of the models one has to
identify oneself whether being a behaviourist, a cognitivist, or a constructivist, amongst other
content and procedural related considerations.

Being unable to distinctively identify myself belonging solely to any one of the movements,
rather being in favour of a layering or relational approach to this matters, I chose to use a
hybrid model depending on my subject and learner’s requirements for every course unit
(lesson). The “layering or relational approach” is based on my assumption that these
educational, and not only, theories are concentrating on different layers of the pedagogic
being (subjects, relationships, resources) rather than being right or wrong. In a way they are
all correct to the degree of depth they are examining pedagogy. This view enabled me to fly
up and down these layers depending on my lesson objectives, learners’ needs and content
utilisation or transferability, and exploring their breadths.

Through this exploration I have come to realise 16 how new theories have emerged in the
context of current technologies in education.
Also, I have defined my role as an e-tutor and my responsibility to online instruction and
learners17.

16
DERIVED FROM MY REFLECTIVE JOURNAL: It has come to my knowledge that behaviourists have only explored a
small area of the vast abyss of the subconscious, compared to the cognitivists who are dealing with more theories concerning the
human intelligence as a concept, and constructivists, in their turn, have only stated one or two functions of the mechanisms of the
human brain, upon which they base their theories. It appears to be that behaviourists deal with the subconscious, cognitivists with
the conscious mind and constructivists with the mechanics of the vessel of the prior two. Contemporary theories although not
questioning, tend to place the individual in groups and teams and assessing against his own potentials, thus giving a humanistic
aura to their approach, while maintaining an organisational and managerial view of learning proving their optimum production
scope.
So education can be seen from the following philosophic and historical aspects:
The well being of the individual (humanistic)- renaissance
From its role to the productive society (meritocracy)- industrial and modern era
From both (optimum discreet compromise)- post modern era
New emerging technologies in the third millennium provide the opportunities for a change. But first, it is of major importance to
identify that all three preceding aspects require a physical building placed in a specific geographical area and which has bonds
with that environment. This has now changed. So it does not surprise us to observe that new theories involve an individualistic
approach to learning, more learner-centred and above all more opportunistic, in the global economy context. The big question
now is “what next?”
The current aim is towards off campus courses from anywhere by everyone. But would it be too daring to speculate that with
current science orientations learning would bring anything and anywhere towards everyone?
The current shift towards learners’ needs shows the bold step of education to reach students but doesn’t also provide the fear that
we are approaching critical mass? When “everyone” has access to “any” education “anywhere” he likes this suggests that several
establishments will disappear and many students will lack the motivation to join in since, with globalization, the whole world has
become a closed system and in my place we have a saying regarding closed systems “frying ones leaver with ones body fat”
showing the cannibalistic nature of humans when reaching critical (economic) mass conditions and operating in optimum energy
conservation conditions. This is happening now. Shall we manage to attract newcomers that would otherwise be out of schooling
or shall we facilitate home education or just provide an excuse for no education at all?
NOTE: On second thought, the system is closed in the economical sense only, or if there is an attempt of reproduction of
knowledge. In the case of new knowledge production, an open system is maintained (considering the input of new students every
generation). Thus the “needs gap” is already trying to be bridged through the online blogs and newsgroups that are full of new
ideas and exchange of knowledge

17
Appendix 6
Principles of learning related to e-learning
Stage 4:
Redefining original “Problem”
Refined Hypothesis

In the light of the time constraints emerged, I have decided to use my material only
for revision purposes. Because of the reason that my students do not have to sit exams
in d&t at the end of the year, I will not force them to revise, but I will offer the
opportunity to be involved in the course only to those choosing to do so. Therefore
there will be no mandatory participation. For assessment and motivation purposes,
extra marks will be allocated to those involved.
Reflection
Stage 5:
Selection of Research Procedures
A critique of methodologies
On method of current teaching and learning
Although I could consider my self a good teacher, especially when listening to students’
opinion, I am not happy with my teaching. I expect more on my behalf with respect to results.
For this to happen, I need more teaching resources, that, as mentioned before, I design my
self. So, most of my time is absorbed by this task. During holiday breaks I plan my teaching
by devising from the curriculum the objectives I will consider next, in my teaching, and during
weekends I revisit my plans and update them, also I allow time for marking. Weekdays are
spent for the next day’s lesson planning and material collection from books and the internet. I
am most of the time one week ahead in my planning so to allow for photocopying and other
unsuspected delays. Further on, I have to study for this course. No time is left for social
activities. I would like to be more efficient in my preparation and at work, in addition to
bettering the quality of teaching. I come to realise that the only solution to this is by applying a
blended, hybrid model of teaching to free up my time by ensuring re-usability of my content.
Initial designing will be more time consuming but after the first two years of teaching it will be
come more time effective. By lifting the bourdon of daily teaching towards afternoon and
individual online learning, I could free up my time and resources to concentrate in the
quality of my teaching in the classroom and online. I will be able to plan f2f lessons
with meta-cognitive and extra-curricular objectives and enhance the experience of
learning for every single student.

On method of online teaching and learning


Littlejohn, 2002, suggests storyboarding as a useful technique for planning online courses.
Value is given to the communication of text and ideas between the design team. Jolliffe et
al18, however have a more scientific but nevertheless practical and professional approach to
the whole process, breaking it into 18 steps.

On sampling
Data collected is adequate for an evaluation. Further data are expected to be collected by my
secondary target audience in the week to follow. Had my teaching been 2 weeks advanced I
would have the data collected by now. But I am already ahead of schedule, since revision is
not provisioned in my planning scheme, the allocated hours in the curriculum are just right to
the end of the course, leaving no space for changes or flexibility.

On choice of materials (curriculum planning)


My curriculum planning as mentioned, was based on Jolliffe’s handbook. Furthermore, when I
advanced in his described steps, I decided to proceed in my own way. Planning for face to
face instruction habits helped me in handling issues of critical decisions, like time allocations,
18
Jolliffe, Jonathan Ritter & david Stevens: The Online Learning Handbook: Developing and Using
Web-Based Learning (2003). The Times Higher Education Supplement, London.
judgements concerning what goes in and what goes out. I did not feel needed any formal
script for presenting my planning, like storyboarding due to the fact that the course was short,
and I had not the facility to communicate my ideas with a team. This saved me time, with out
reducing my planning capacity. More or less, in an experiential way I knew what I had to
consider, but perhaps a more see-through way could be used to have my planning outlined
for the purpose of documenting in this report. The only thing left to describe it is the
presentation shown, as a zipped file called polisappnedix8.zip attached with the report. This
helped me a lot in the initial steps of my planning; followed by an artistic approach freeing my
convergent thinking to a divergent and creative style, and intuition as a practitioner to take
place. I have come to the conclusion that when time is pressing this method is more
productive and efficient, and produces better results. I preferred to end product quality results
with expense in documenting all my thoughts and visually displaying it on paper.
Evaluation Report
Stage 6:
Identification of the evaluation procedures to be used
Evaluation objectives
In review of our success criteria and the Action Research objectives, in Stage 1, the following
evaluation criteria were derived:
• Were all students involved in web supported learning?
• Were students motivated?
• Was teacher’s time used effectively?
• Were subject inspector’s recommendations met?
• Was the curriculum enhanced?
• Was collaborative learning encouraged?
• Was there provision for differentiation and progression?
• Was the material developed reusable and re-purposeful?
• Was the course manageable and controllable?
• Were there interactivity and flexibility?

Time plan

Evaluation spans from the first day of implementation (9 th of May, 2005) towards the end of
the week (14th of May, 2005) for the Microteaching sessions (primary group), to the 17 th of
May, 2005 when the official MT session evaluation took place, up to the implementation
period for the secondary group which started on the 19th of May, 2005 until 3rd of May, 2005.
During this time, data were selected from the students in the form of an evaluation rubric,
selected and adapted to meet my requirements.
Furthermore, the discussion script of the evaluation session held by course tutors, was
considered in greater extend.

FInal evaluation was constructed in the light of the data and sources described during the
writing up of this report.

In the meanwhile, interviews, emails and in person comments were collected by various
others, with relevant experience in the field. Such as19 Ted from www.datascan.com, V. Ryan
from World Association of Technology Teachers, Subject’s inspector, colleagues, students,
Head of departments, IT related friends.

19
Appendix 7
Task 3
Stage 7:
Implementation and monitoring of the action plan
Online Teaching
Three of the students participated in MTsessions. None went through the end though. I
received evaluation reports with excellent comments from all three.
I had planned to assist students in their work, and was logged on for several hours waiting for
the sound notice from my laptop that another user added me to their contact. This never
happened, but with more audience it will be possible and individual support will be given as
planned. The whiteboard facility could be used to exchange text, diagrams, sketches and
ideas. Even videoconferencing or plain audio chats were planned to take place.

Monitoring method
My monitoring was ensured through the reception of homework1 and quiz1 and assignment.
Quiz 2 was planned to provide a metacognitive feedback to the learners and also the
feedback for required for evaluation, further guidance on how to proceed.

Monitoring frequency
MSN Messenger provided a means of continuous and whenever required monitoring.
Therefore in addition to the daily receipts of mail the frequency of monitoring was to the
highest degree possible. The evaluation document at the end gave the formative feedback.
Evaluation Report
Stage 8:
Interpretation of data and evaluation
Evaluation by my tutor
Tutors comments were positive. In contrast to my fears that low participation was a negative
factor, my peers and tutor pointed out that I did motivate my students in discussion boards
and with the material presented. It turned out human resources where not adequate for my
ambition to teach the whole group.

2 points of satisfaction from the implementation:


1. I felt happy about the fact that i completed the design in less
time than I thought, and the results surprised me in a positive
way

2. Since I designed the whole curriculum before hand (previous


month) I felt i was in control of the different aspects, theory
and implementation, and I could lead my way through the work. i
felt i knew what i was doing

2 points I was not happy about:


1. I would really like to be able to make it more interactive
(although i antcipated that factor by linking to an interactive
site for an activity work)
2. Participation. I think this is going to be the most difficult
part in my carrer, To attract and motivate learners in my courses

Reflecting, I would suggest to myself to allow for collaborative thinking in online learning.
That would be a motivating factor.

Evaluation by the students at UU20


in summary the content was appropriate; pitched at the level of the learner, good direction
with simple design, with great resources and links . Scaffolding assisted the 'new' learner.
Questions could be posed, perhaps as a Q-A forum to help students’ learning.
Pedagogic strategies used, allowed for novice learners’ induction and motivation.
Discussion threads were visited and updated continuously; this motivated learners to
participate and interact with each other. My idea of students meeting in face was considered
good.

Evaluation by my students and peers at Gymnasio Droshias


No data collected in writing. Feedback gave some positive comments, no negative comments.
A constructive comment tha caught my attention was that of my colleague and d&t teacher21:
he suggested, with regards to design, was to add a site map page, and make it more
interactive, like the assessment for example. Generally I received positive comments for the
design, the idea and the content: “professional look (did you use a template?)”

20
Appendix 7
21
Appendix 7
Self evaluation. Evaluation against success criteria set ioriginally
• Were all students involved in web supported learning?
Both, from the primary and the secondary targeted audiences participation was not as
expected. Time constraints, other obligations, lack of connectivity and skills where the primary
issues for this situation.
• Were students motivated?
From their comments they were motivated enough. The results, nevertheless show the
opposite. Low participation is in most cases associated with low motivation to participate. Not
meaning that the effort to design what is acceptably a motivating content would result in the
desired engagement. External to the educator factors always intervene. The medium offering
online learning, hence the internet, is strangulated by the ether in between the web server
and learner’s desktop. Everything and everybody in between those long kilometers separating
physically the two device is a potential obstruction.
• Was teacher’s time used effectively?
In fact the answer is affirmative. Both for the design and the delivery of the lessons totally,
less time was spent in contrast to f2f delivery. It is expected that design is demanding in time
but when the material is implemented over a large group of learners the compensation in time
is immediate.

• Were subject inspector’s recommendations and tutor’s expectations met?


From their feedback both were pleased, and provided positive comments cited in the
appendices
• Was the curriculum enhanced?
My curriculum was greatly enhanced, in ICT skills, revision content and from the system’s
approach to the content of electronics, I have employed, as a teaching strategy.
Collaborative learning will take place in the sense that students have arranged to meet
together to handle the material online together.
• Was collaborative learning encouraged?
I am planning for next week and when they engage fully in the course to suggest they
exchange their contact information on MSN messenger so that they can tackle the tasks
collaboratively and without requiring me online presence.
• Was there provision for differentiation and progression?
Differentiation in the content came in the form that allowed different design assignments for
the learners. In the process by the relaxed schedule provided to allow tackling of the material
in their own span. And by outcome in the different answers and assignments provided by the
learners. Progression through the content was very obvious. Material progresses from
transmission of knowledge to scaffold activities for transaction of knowledge and ends with
transformation of learners in the highest level (lesson 3) of skill acquisition, the synthesis and
evaluation (Bloom).
• Was the material developed reusable and re-purposeful?
I intend to re-use the material next year and enrich its content. Provision for this was taken in
the sense that the format of text and files allows for re-use. Images can also be used as they
are for other purposes because the circuits where saved as images instead of the simulation
programme extensions solely. Consideration was taken to split the material into the smallest
chunks of learning bits (legos) so that they will be reused.
• Was the course manageable and controllable?
In my surprise it was. With greater participation, though, things could become tougher
specifically in online chats. An estimated number of maximum 6 learners are considered to be
ideal.
• Were there interactivity and flexibility?
Interactivity was provided not as much as by the content I designed, than in the lrefered
material (like www.dtonline.org and crocodile clips) in this sense it was highly interactive.
Tests could be made interactive and fun to attract attention and motivate engagement.

Generally I am pleased with my work. I could spend more time with documenting my steps,
including collaborative activities and making interactive quizzes. But my aim was not a techie
outlook but a resource I could actually use in a productive and effective way, and this in
overall was achieved.

What will be considered in the next cycle of AR


1. Incorporation of the rest of the electronic content to support web blended learning.
Issues that derive from this, like design and implementation. Effectiveness.
2. Usability/ accessibility: language selection (bilingual content)
3. Interactivity, especially with assessment
4. Question and Answer facility
5. Factors that encourage student participation in online learning
Bibliography
The Technology Teacher; 3/1/2005; Harrison, Henry L., III: The created
environment: an assessment tool for technology education teachers: creativity
doesn't just happen by chance; the prepared environment nourishes it.

1. Norman Jackson, ltsn generic centre (Learning and Teaching Support


Netwrok: Designing for Creativity: A Curriculum Guide

2. Kathleen T. Brinko, Appalachian State University: Envisioning Your


Course: Questions to Ask as You Design Your Course , derived from:
http://www.irc.uci.edu/trg/28.html [online], accessed: 24/5/2005. Source: The
Teaching Professor, February 1991

Jonassen, McAleese & Duffy’s (1993), Conitnuum of Knowledge Acquisition Model

3. Gustafson et al, 1997

4. ATHERTON J S (2003) Learning and Teaching: Motivation to Learn (inc.


Maslow) [On-line] UK: Available:
http://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/motivlrn.htm Accessed: 4 March
2005

5. Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou: Designing to Learn and Learning to Design: an


overview of instructional design models (2002). LTSN generic netwrk.UK

6. HERZBERG F (1966) Work and the Nature of Man Cleveland: World


Publishing Company
Appendices
Appendix 1

This resource is given as a powerpoint presentation format in


appendix8presentation.zip
Appendix 2
Action Plan (Related to Task 2 and the Reflective Journal)
Initial Steps to follow:

To cause interactions:

1st week December:


First I will speak to the closest colleague (D&T Gregoris) and my supervisor (Evdokia) for their
support and get some feedback of how this sounds and who else might be interested to help.
Then I must speak to the subject inspector’s counselor informing him for the problem I have
identified and my considerations for taking action. I expect a positive reaction to my approach
and I count on considerable help with regards to curriculum design and further guidance.

2nd week December:


If I find positive responses, I will talk to students about my plans and identify those originally
motivated for online learning. They will be my partners in achieving this through the school
hierarchy. The subject inspector may also ask from the administration to provide any help
required for my work.

The next step is to speak about this to my principal or a vice principal first (for support) and
ensure that funding for hosting or web space will be provided by the school (more preferable).
Any advice or oppositions will be negotiated. If students are supporting this I see no reason
for lack of support from the school.

3rd week December:


Students willing to participate will be identified and parents will be informed once
administration says ok through post. Students must have an “OK” signed by parents
referencing to appropriate Assessment Contracts that will be provided later.

Christmas Holidays:
In the mean time I will be working on adapting the curriculum to incorporate online learning
and employment of strategies more suitable to my students. This will be negotiated in
advance with subject inspector or her counselor.

By 15th of January:
A plan must be ready by then on how to access the material and what is expected by them.
Students and teacher will sign assessment contracts.

After 15th of January:


Start the design of the online course. It must be finished by end of February when I plan to
proceed to practical work at school. Read Joliffe’s et al Handbook to online learning and
prepare notes for guidance during the design phase.

Because assessment is highly considered in my country: Feedback will be provided online for
tests, while class time will be spent on practical activities that will lead to a project work. There
will be more work for students engaged in web supported learning and appropriate measures
will be taken to ensure fairness of assessment provided the work load with the quality of
learning taking place.

4th week of April and first week of May:


Design of the webpage and finish off. Teaching starts on the 9th of May. Initially it was agreed
on the 16th of May but it was suggested by my tutor to change to earlier date so that I will
have time to write the report.

2nd week of May:


Implementation

3rd week of May until 1st week of June:


Evaluation
Appendix 3 (Related to Reflective Journal)

On my meeting with inspector’s counselor Yiannakis Efthymiou a few weeks ago (November
2004), he has suggested that our lesson should proceed to a more practical approach. Inspite
the theoretical nature of the subject curriculum, teachers should make it more practical and
promote collaborative and peer learning;

Having these in mind and the fact that more able students may be disadvantaged by the lack
of differentiation so far, I have decided to proceed to blended learning. This approach will
enable me to support differentiation for more able students through online learning while
practicals will be held at class time.

Grade A students with access to the www will be selected to take part in this project which will
be a mandatory part of their study. It should be their choice with their parents consent, and
the support from the administration of the school. Ministry of education should be informed.
Appendix 4
Action Plan: Interactions and Steps to follow (Related to Task 2)
Appendix 5
E-moderating Activities (instructional strategies at micro-level, relating to lesson
objectives). (Task 2 related):

 Reading
 From text on html page
 From slideshow presentations
 From following hyperlinks
 From interactive animated applications
 Writing
 On note taking utility
 On interactive quizzes
 On word editor (own pc)
 On chats
 On discussion forums
 Interacting
 Hyperlinks
 Quizzes
 Chats
 Discussion forums
 Navigating
 Calendar
 Downloaded electronics simulation programme
 Video conferencing
 Streaming video/ audio
 MS Producer 2003
 Communicating
 Chat
 Discussion forum
 Messenger
 Video/ audio conferencing
 Email
 Newsletter/ listserv
 Problem Solving
 Group activities
 discussion forums
 email,
 video conferencing, messenger
 Project work
 web expeditions
 web contests
 Mind Map tools
 Downloaded software for flowcharting etc.
 Role playing
 Video conferencing/audio
 chat
Appendix 6
Notes from my Reflective Journal concerning my role as an online instructor nad my
responsibilities to the learners. (Related to Reflective Journal):
1. What is online teaching for you?

For me, online teaching is a high capacity vessel sailing towards unexplored lands.

A part of this trip I am learning through this course as a passenger.

And it is my duty, through this module, to embark on a boat with some of my own students and sail
towards a nearby island, found in our course, that I have visited beforehand in order to let them find out
in person and in their unique personal way the natural treasures on this island.

I will be the captain of the boat and their guide in an online tour. Boarding is optional, but the capacity
of this vessel allows for secondary audience (other future students or current visitors of the website)
apart from the main group (my students); this is why the excitement we all have about this trip in an
adventurous approach (student intrinsic and extrinsic motivation) is in contrast to the alternative of
listening to stories (through f2f instruction) about the island [active learning-humanistic model
(reflective-experiential-Gestalt-constructionist) versus instructional behaviourist model (behaviourism-
cognitive-)].

The boat is my resource, the island is my curriculum, the route is my methodology, the navigation is
my approach and the tours on the island, once there, are my lessons.

My compass is my reflectively informed practice. The obstacles and dangers of the trip are associated
with the difficulties found in online delivery. Some problems exist while sailing and some when we are
on the island. Always aware of their needs, I must be there for them.

This trip has a starting point (student previous knowledge) and an end (learning objectives). It has a
schedule (learning activities) that we all must meet that I as a captain must plan ahead.

The blue water surface of the ocean represents the major change that this hybrid model promises to
bring to us all and the depth is the educational gap that is potentially going to be bridged.

2. How will you blend learning with current practices?

I intend to blend learning with my current practices as seamlessly as possible. Seams are the points of
intersection and are identified in the following areas:
• distinct learning activities
o From f2f instruction to online tutorials,
o from group activities to video conferencing,
o from lecture to online slideshow,
o from focused practical task (FPT) to video demonstration,
o from investigative, disassembly and evaluation activities (IDEAs) to interactive
applications and
o From lesson recap to formative assessment (online quiz).

• Cognitive skills:
o From listening to reading,
o From verbal to visual
o From speaking to writing text
o Information to knowledge
o From comprehension to application
o From analysis to synthesis
o From evaluation to reflection
o From cognition to meta-cognition

• Social skills
o From class group work setting to the online community building
o From class rules to netiquette
o From cooperative learning to collaborative learning,
o From verbal and non- verbal communication skills to ICT skills,
o From plain reality to role playing,
o From facial expressions to emoticons,
o From body language to the promotion of linguistic acquisition
From the above demonstration of the contrast between the new and current learning, seamless
blending seems impossible. But what if I try to smear the different variables into undistinguishable
outcomes? This will become apparent once blended learning is supported in a way that the two layers
of f2f and web learning content and activities instead of intercepting they overlap (timely and, by
quantity and quality) or complement each other where appropriate, like gears meshing. This would
mean that simultaneously during regular lesson time students use both methods to learn according to
their preferences/needs/progress. Complementarily, extension activities are given as online class work
or homework.

In this way groups of five can be formed to work in a collaborative fashion: group members are
assigned roles. Some of them will be:

Assigned Role description Skills related Industrial professions


group roles applicable- real life related

data fishermen selectively collecting information Research, information, ICT, Production line
from the web following a related comprehension
links section for study

minesweepers identifying and overcoming Inquiry, analysis, HR, Design


obstacles faced by group application

thinking tanks making decisions based on the Decision-making, Executive, Administration


work of the first two group synthesis, evaluation
members

record keepers information distributors Organising, Secretary, Accounting


coordination

time keepers encouragers positive thinking, Marketing planning, Sales


interpersonal

Table 1: Original idea contribution for the implementation of the course to my students at
Gymnasio Droshias

Roles will be hired on rotation (every lesson different role within the same group). After five lessons
the groups will be reformed.

3. How will you break your curriculum down into online learning components?
According to Joliffe A et al, It is imperative what I want the students to learn through this course and
how I am going to develop the materials.
It is also vital to think small, in order to manage effectively the volume of work and time
available; also, class teaching varies in many aspects from online learning therefore the curriculum
needs to be redesigned to apply for the new settings of blended learning. Explicit curriculum must be
broken into the smallest and most re-usable chunks (compositional model). It is in my custom to
approach the curriculum as a whole (impositional model) and then identify the smallest chunks to
form the basis of lessons and learning outcomes. But from the assessment point of view it is definitely
the first case, since students collect marks from various formative assessments and then added
together to form the term mark. Summative assessment is still based on individual lesson exercises
and content. Some will form the basis of f2f and some of web learning; both of these will take place in
class or at home (homework). Implicit curriculum inherently will be different as well as the null due to
time and resource limitations. One can presume that the whole curriculum will be completely different.
The material to be taught will be basically identical as current learning, but methods, time, resources;
even objectives will change to accommodate the hybrid model.

So, breaking the curriculum I would utilise the features of hyperlinks to saved web pages on the hard
disk that contain information on transistors and where found on the web. These will be stored on the
pc from a cd that I will prepare beforehand. This is a necessity because I do not currently have access
to the web from my workshop (classroom). Also saved on the pc will be a discussion board of
messages stored to enable discussion on issues concerning the lesson. Students will be able to access
a quiz at the end of each lesson for formative assessment. Student marks will be stored automatically
in a database system (if I get to make it to work)

From home students will access my site and use:


• Content area for studying the material in a structured way (powerpoint slideshows, text.
Circuits will be created in crocodile clips and manipulated in fireworks if interaction is
required)
• links to other sites as extension activities,
• Homework
• Assessment: online quizzes. Student record (of assessed material)
• Student interaction with chat application, where we will have scheduled tutorials and
discussion boards for Q-A and other support (must have a facility for saving it and
updating the one stored in classroom computers everyday)
4. What resources will you require?
• Access to a VLE
• Flash memory stick
• CD writer
• Frontpage or dreamweaver
• Powerpoint
• Fireworks and Photoshop
• Crocodile Clips
• 2 more PCs in the workshop (to be borrowed)
• Compatibility between VLE and stored html pages on PCs

5. How will you deliver your curriculum online?


Partly from home access for students and partly from class daily updates of web material. The greatest
volume of the course will be stored initially from a Cd. Only some students will take part in the online
curriculum and arrangements will be made to customise their assessment form. An instructor-student
contract must be generated describing what is required and underlining their commitment. (Parents
must be informed?).
Appendix 7
Data collected form various individuals through email:
From: George Hadjioannou [georghios.h@cytanet.com.cy]
Sent: Τρίτη, 24 Μαΐου 2005 9:30 μμ
To: '@polis'
Subject: RE:

Αγαπητέ Πόλυ

Απολογούμαι γιατί άργησα να σου απαντήσω. Επιτέλους βρήκα την ώρα να δω το site που ετοίμασες. Οι
παρατηρήσεις μου είναι οι ακόλουθες :

Πολύ καλό web design δείχνει πολύ professional. ( Είναι Template ή δικό σου design ? ) Θα μπορούσες όμως να
πυκνώσεις λίγο την πρώτη σου σελίδα και να φαίνονται τα buttons με την πρώτη. Επίσης όταν οδηγείται κάποιος σε
external link είναι καλύτερα να ανοίγει σε νέο παράθυρο. Γενικά έτσι υπάρχουν περισσότερες πιθανότητες να μην
κάνει sidetracking. Μια άλλη εισήγηση είναι να βάλεις μια σελίδα ως site map. Στο μέλλον όποτε βρεις καιρό μπορεί
να το κάνεις πιο interactive. Π.χ. σε ορισμένα quiz που μπορεί να γίνει με multiple choice μπορεί να δίνεται και
βαθμολογία και η σωστή απάντηση.

Γενικά πολύ καλό περιεχόμενο και η όλη ιδέα. Αν θέλεις μπορώ να πω στον Μάριο που διαχειρίζεται ιστοσελίδα του
Συνδέσμου να βάλει την διεύθυνση της σελίδας σου στα links.

Σε συγχαίρω και σου εύχομαι καλή συνέχεια.

Γιώργος Χατζηιωάννου.

From: Tech it Out [editor@techitoutuk.com]


Sent: ?a?as?e??, 20 ?a??? 2005 1:32 µµ
To: apolis@cytanet.com.cy
Subject: Add a site

Hi Polis,

Thanks for your message and link to DT Scan. I believe that we have been in contact before.

I have looked at your interesting site and will add a link to it. Is it aimed at teachers to use with their students
online or for the students to use as a source of self-learning?

Have you looked at my 60+ pages on electronics www.techitoutuk.com/tio8/knowledge/electronics/


I wrote them because I had to teach electronics at a school where the previous teacher removed all books/materials.
They are data pages with no attempt to teach/homework. I did that in class.
I have developed an inteactive quiz
www.techitoutuk.com/tio8/projects/tags/quiz/
Feel free to use any of my material/diagrams

It's nice to find a kindred sprit,

Tony

----- Original Message -----


From: "www-data" <www-data@empire.bsnet.co.uk>
To: <editor@dtscan.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 2:52 PM
Subject: Suggested Site

>
>
> Site was submitted on May 19, 2005 @ 2:52 pm:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Bgcolor: #ffcc99
>
> Text Color: #a0522d
>
> Name: Polis Aniftos
>
> Email: apolis@cytanet.com.cy
>
> Organisation: Technognosia
>
> State: Cyprus
>
> Suggested-New-Site: www.technognosia.org.uk
>
> Description: Subject: Basic Electronics- A systems approach, for Key Stage
> 3, Year 9(Language: English).
> A pilot study on e-learning. The original material was used as a
> postgraduate assignment, currently running as web supported learning
> resource for my students' revision, at Gymnasio Droshias.
>
> End Of Data: Submit Your Site
>
> -------------------------------------------------------

From evaluation log:


Annette Bolger--(16082704)>>1. Scaffolded approach was well thought out and
with plenty of resources for the learner to engage with and find answers to
the questions Polis posed.

Annette Bolger--(16082704)>>2. This type of learning approach would be the


best and most effective for me in particular for this subject had I the time
to participate fully.

Michelle Devlin--(10164420)>>why Annette? what was good?

Annette Bolger--(16082704)>>3. I find the whole area of physics,


electronics, science etc. not an easy one to comprehend but the approach
that Polis took was

Annette Bolger--(16082704)>>exploratory and 'forced' the learner to engage,


but in a relaxed way.

Annette Bolger--(16082704)>>It was good because it was a true


scaffolded approach, where there was direction of learning with
learning outcomes in mind

Sinead Blair--(16012604)>>I thought the web resource was content rich and
very easy to navigate through

Michelle Devlin--(10164420)>>how was this achieved ?

Sinead Blair--(16012604)>>Given the time restrictions I had I could not go


through everything

Sinead Blair--(16012604)>>His design was plain and simple... but effective

Sinead Blair--(16012604)>>the white background made the text easy to read

Sinead Blair--(16012604)>>and the I really liked the links for the


lesson and quiz