490077 SE Seminar on Designing Inclusive Educational Processes (2023S)
Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung
Labels
GEMISCHT
An/Abmeldung
Hinweis: Ihr Anmeldezeitpunkt innerhalb der Frist hat keine Auswirkungen auf die Platzvergabe (kein "first come, first served").
- Anmeldung von Mi 01.02.2023 09:00 bis Mi 15.02.2023 09:00
- Anmeldung von Mi 22.02.2023 09:00 bis Di 28.02.2023 09:00
- Abmeldung bis Fr 17.03.2023 12:00
Details
max. 25 Teilnehmer*innen
Sprache: Englisch
Lehrende
Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert
- Donnerstag 04.05. 13:00 - 15:00 Digital
- Donnerstag 11.05. 10:00 - 17:00 Seminarraum 4 341 Porzellangasse 4 3.OG
- Freitag 12.05. 10:00 - 17:00 Seminarraum 4 341 Porzellangasse 4 3.OG
- Samstag 13.05. 10:00 - 16:00 Seminarraum 4 341 Porzellangasse 4 3.OG
Information
Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung
Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel
- Written reflective assignment related to the contents of the seminar (individual task)
- Participatory elaboration and documentation of an exemplary of lesson plan including practical presentation and revision based on instructors’ and peer feedback (group work)
- Written and oral feedback to peers’ lesson plans (individual task)
- Participatory elaboration and documentation of an exemplary of lesson plan including practical presentation and revision based on instructors’ and peer feedback (group work)
- Written and oral feedback to peers’ lesson plans (individual task)
Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab
Attendance in this course is mandatory. Timely submission of all partial services and holding the presentation are a prerequisite for a positive evaluation.The following tasks are summed up and used for the grading:Individual tasks:
- Written Peer-Feedback: max. 20 pointsSehr Gut: 89 - 100 points
Gut: 76 - 88 points
Befriedigend: 63 - 75 points
Genügend: 50 - 62 points
Nicht genügend: less than 50 pointsGroup work:
- Reflective exercise: max. 20 points
- Practical presentation and written report (concept of lesson plan): max. 60 points
- Written Peer-Feedback: max. 20 pointsSehr Gut: 89 - 100 points
Gut: 76 - 88 points
Befriedigend: 63 - 75 points
Genügend: 50 - 62 points
Nicht genügend: less than 50 pointsGroup work:
- Reflective exercise: max. 20 points
- Practical presentation and written report (concept of lesson plan): max. 60 points
Prüfungsstoff
Literatur
Braun, A., Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Hoskins, K. (2011). Taking context seriously: Towards explaining policy enactments in the secondary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 585–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2011.601555
Iivari, N., Kinnula, M., & Kuure, L. (2018). Exclusions in social inclusion projects : Struggles in involving children in digital technology development. September 2016, 1020–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12180
Roque, R., Tamashiro, M. A., McConnell, K., & Granados, J. (2021). Opportunities and Limitations of Construction Kits in Culturally Responsive Computing Contexts: Lessons from ScratchJr and Family Creative Learning. Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children, IDC 2021, 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3460728
Schaper, M.-M., Malinverni, L., & Valero, C. (2020). Robot Presidents: Who should rule the world? Teaching Critical Thinking in AI through Reflections upon Food Traditions. Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1145/3419249.3420085
Schaper, M.-M. and Ruiz Garcia, A. (2023). Three recommendations to engage At-Risk Students in Critical Reflection on Intelligent Technologies through Remote Learning. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’23), April 23–28, 2023, Hamburg, Germany. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544549.3573862
Tissenbaum, M. et al. 2021. The case for alternative endpoints in computing education. British Journal of Educational Technology. 52, 3 (2021), 1164–1177. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13072.
Yu, J., Ruppert, J., Roque, R., & Kirshner, B. (2020). Youth civic engagement through computing: cases and implications. ACM Inroads, 11(4), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432727
Iivari, N., Kinnula, M., & Kuure, L. (2018). Exclusions in social inclusion projects : Struggles in involving children in digital technology development. September 2016, 1020–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12180
Roque, R., Tamashiro, M. A., McConnell, K., & Granados, J. (2021). Opportunities and Limitations of Construction Kits in Culturally Responsive Computing Contexts: Lessons from ScratchJr and Family Creative Learning. Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children, IDC 2021, 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3460728
Schaper, M.-M., Malinverni, L., & Valero, C. (2020). Robot Presidents: Who should rule the world? Teaching Critical Thinking in AI through Reflections upon Food Traditions. Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1145/3419249.3420085
Schaper, M.-M. and Ruiz Garcia, A. (2023). Three recommendations to engage At-Risk Students in Critical Reflection on Intelligent Technologies through Remote Learning. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ’23), April 23–28, 2023, Hamburg, Germany. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544549.3573862
Tissenbaum, M. et al. 2021. The case for alternative endpoints in computing education. British Journal of Educational Technology. 52, 3 (2021), 1164–1177. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13072.
Yu, J., Ruppert, J., Roque, R., & Kirshner, B. (2020). Youth civic engagement through computing: cases and implications. ACM Inroads, 11(4), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432727
Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis
Letzte Änderung: Do 11.05.2023 11:28
The agenda of Computational Empowerment points towards the need for inclusive approaches for supporting all students in learning about the development of digital literacy. In this context, previous research has shown that particularly underrepresented groups such as students with diverse socio-cultural backgrounds and young women benefit less from educational initiatives in this field. The seminar focuses on conveying concrete strategies for involving underrepresented student groups in critical and reflective learning processes about emerging technologies. One particular emphasis of the seminar lies on scaffolding participants‘ reflective practices about the potential risks in the development and application of emerging technologies in relation to the target group (e.g. the marginalization through algorithmic bias within a digital society).As an introduction to the theme, the participants will first explore different technologies (z.B. Scratch, Teachable Machine, Dance with AI) and discuss their potential risks for underrepresented target groups. Further, through hands-on tasks and literature, the participants will focus on application opportunities of these technologies in the classroom and educational principles to design learning activities with and about them. The final goal of the seminar is the conceptual development of an exemplary project week focusing on the theme Human vs. Algorithmic Bias. Through participatory design methods and peer-feedback, the participants will put their proposals into practice, evaluate and iterate on them.Goals:
- Overview of application opportunities and educational contents about emerging technologies in relation to underrepresented target groups
- Introduction to potentials and societal risks of emerging technologies, specifically in relation to underrepresented target groups
- Introduction to inclusive learning strategies for involving students in the principles of digitalization
- Capacitation of planning of a project task in the field of digital education and inclusionMethods:
- Reading and Literature research
- Reflection on contents based on provided tasks and questions
- Testing and reflection of digital and hands-on strategies (e.g. Cultural Responsiveness, Embodied Learning, critical reflection on marginalized perspectives)
- Participatory design process and practical testing of exemplary project school week
- Written and oral peer-feedbacks based on provided questions