Jerrod's EDCI 339: Distributed & Open Learning Blog

In my Topic 3 blog post, I reflected upon the article, Chapter 4 of Design Principles for Indigenous Learning Spaces and the ways in which open learning spaces, physical and digital, are transformed by culture and community by making connections to a local story about a young, indigenous knowledge keeper who used her knowledge of computer skills to document and share the Ktunaxa language to help create the First Voices Indigenous language database. Through this system, indigenous communities are able to collect and document language systems for the purpose of translating and sharing endangered languages with others. In effect, the First Voices system acts as an OER that users can use to document and preserve their culture.

In this post, I would like to take a more focussed look at into how this process unfolded as well as how educators can use this story as a framework to design open learning contexts that benefit whole communities.

To give some backstory and perspective on this issue, I feel it is beneficial to discuss the context behind the disappearance of the Ktunaxa language as well as its reemergence. As is it historically known, children in indigenous communities in Canada and the United States were forced to attend residential schools, where students were forbidden from speaking their native language and partaking in other culturally significant practices. As a result of the cultural devastation left in the wake of the introduction of residential schools in indigenous communities, generations of children were denied opportunities to speak and practice their native language, which contributed to the loss of unique perspectives and ways of seeing and relating to the world through a unique cultural lens. It should be known that the Ktunaxa language is a language isolate, meaning that it is unrelated to any other language in the world, and any efforts to revive the language without the guidance of living speakers would be immensely challenging. Although generations of Ktunaxa youth were denied access to their native language, there were still elders in the community who spoke the language fluently. However, since there were a small number of individuals who spoke the language fluently, and as many of them were at a vulnerable age, time was quickly running out to save the Ktunaxa language from extinction. This is when Marissa Philips, a young Ktunaxa woman living in the Aq’am community outside of Cranbrook, British Columbia, combined her love of technology with her love of her people’s language to create a Ktunaxa language podcast. Accessing taped recordings and converting them into MP3 format, she created a series of language lessons that could be used to introduce young children in her community to the language that was spoken in the land since time immemorial. In a video published by Al Jazeera on YouTube entitled, Living The Language – Canada: The Ktunaxa, Marissa mentions, “technology is a great way to preserve our elders because in the next several years we are going to be losing a lot of that knowledge and since the younger generation is so well adapted to using technology it only makes sense to me.” With access to hundreds of tapes featuring thousands of hours of recorded language from elders who have since passed on, Marissa and other Ktunaxa knowledge keepers continue to use technology to document and share the language in a format that is accessible to others, including the public. Through the use of innovative language programs, such as the First Voices online resource, a website created in 2001 by a team of teachers based out of Saanich BC, young students, community members, and the wider public have access to endangered language systems. However, these language programs are more than just learning tools, as they use the spoken voices of Ktunaxa elders past and present. As of 2012, the First Voices website featured languages of over 60 different indigenous communities, with community participants creating their own web porting and recording their own words and phrases to upload into the system. The website features games for children and a language dictionary for users to browse to find specific words and phrases. Another interesting feature of the website includes the ability for users to record their own voice as they say words aloud and play it back to compare their spoken word to recordings in the system. Since many of Ktunaxa words and phrases are verb-based, video clips are a necessary component of language acquisition. On the First Voices website, recorded videos show users how words and phrases are spoken in specific contexts and settings such as a birthday party, campouts, sports, and other daily situations and traditions. Since the First Voices site is only available online, the Ktunaxa council made the decision to invest in installing their own fibre wire network in order to provide their community access to these language resources. Through these efforts to literally and figuratively reconnect their community to their language, the Ktunaxa have taken steps to use technology in ways that reinforce the philosophy of open pedagogy.

So, what does this story mean for educators and members of our learning community? To start, I feel this story provides an opportunity to think about the ways in which open pedagogy can lead to positive changes in local and global communities as a result of putting the focus of projects and assignments on finding solutions. Just as the Ktunaxa people continue to use technology to revive a language that was stolen from them due to the effects of the residential school system, students can engage in projects that are meaningful to them and connect their experiences with others at a local and even global level to enact positive change. If we can find what students are passionate about and use technology to connect them with learning communities that also reflect these passions, we create a system whereby open pedagogy can have an enduring impact on our students and the communities in which we live.

References:

Al Jazeera English. (2012). Living The Language – Canada: The Ktunaxa. YouTube. https://youtu.be/EIPzR6_o4pI

First Voices. (2021). Ktunaxa. First People’s Cultural Council. https://www.firstvoices.com/explore/FV/sections/Data/Ktunaxa/Ktunaxa/Ktunaxa

Kral, I. & Schwab, R.G. (2012). Chapter 4: Design Principles for Indigenous Learning Spaces. Safe Learning Spaces. Youth, Literacy and New Media in Remote Indigenous Australia. ANU Press. http://doi.org/10.22459/LS.08.2012

When researching future educational technologies, I came across the article, 8 Technologies That Will Shape Future Classrooms by Michael Poh. In he article, Poh highlights current and future technologies that will impact the way students learn both at home and in the classroom, including Augmented Reality, 3D printing, cloud computing, online social networking, flexible displays, the use of biometric data tracking, multitouch displays, and online game-based learning. With the exception of flexible displays, multitouch displays, biometric data tracking, and augmented reality, I have had some experience using technologies including Virtual Reality, 3D printing, cloud computing, online social networking and game-based learning in classrooms. Much of this technology comes from our District Resource Centre’s technology lab, a place that students can visit to engage in neat activities that make use of multiple technologies. Two years ago, I brought my class to our district’s technology lab to participate in a lesson about bees. Students had opportunities to zoom-in to bee habitats through the use of Virtual Reality and were able to look at a 3D image featuring the anatomy of a bee. Afterwards, students were able to use tablets with interactive blueprints to build a mechanical construction out of LEGO that simulated how a bee pollinates a flower. Near the end of the lesson, students were able to use their tablets to play interactive, bee-themed games and were able to watch as a 3D printer created cute little plastic bookmarks in the shape of a honeybee. During these activities, I would take pictures of student work and upload them to our class website, which was hosted by our district school network. When I think about how all of these different technologies came together to create an integrated learning experience for my students, I feel there is a lot of potential for technology to motivate student learning and increase engagement. While our district does not have the money to equip every school with things like virtual reality headsets and 3D printers, we are still able to introduce students to technology in ways that show them the potential of how these tools may be used to promote learning. It is in this light that I offer my perspective on the potential of using technology to support equity and multiple perspectives:

Virtual Reality / Virtual Field Trips: VR can be used to give students different perspectives of the world, including being able to take them on virtual field trips to museums, global heritage sites, and even to other classrooms. The use of virtual reality headsets offer students opportunities to be able to experience new perspectives, such as being able to experience what life is like through another’s eyes.

3D Printing: 3D printing allows students to design 3D objects through the use of programs or by scanning something they have already made and share it with others. In turn, students can download schematics, plans, and blueprints from others and print out objects using a 3D printer in their classroom or computer lab. Since many 3D printing schematics are open-source, they are considered as Open Educational Resources.

Social Networking: Right now our district uses MS Teams to connect students with their classrooms and interact with peers through a closed network, however social media integration through the use of student blogs and forums allows students to study together, share resources, and participate in peer interactions that can help to benefit their learning.

Online Game-Based Learning: Online game-based learning is becoming more common in today’s classrooms, as many students use Minecraft Education Edition, Math Prodigy, and online typing games to motivate students and increase their engagement. The future looks very bright for online game-based learning, as more games have integrated social aspects into their games to allow students to play alongside their peers to overcome challenging tasks.

Cloud Computing: As the article states, the days of losing homework or missing school due to a snow day are over thanks to cloud computing. Using cloud computing, students can upload and store their work online, which allows teachers to give feedback on their portfolio entries and track their progress for assessment purposes. Teachers can also use cloud computing to access learning materials from multiple locations and from multiple devices as long as they are on the cloud.

As newer technologies are released to the public, it is important to educators to reflect upon the ways in which these technologies can be used to support equity and engagement in face-to-face, distributed, and open learning contexts. In this way, we are taking steps to future-proof our teaching practices.

The article, Defining OER-enabled Pedagogy, by David Wiley and John Hilton, examines the ways in which Open Educational Resources are used in different teaching contexts, including the ways educators design assignments and projects that support open pedagogy. As a result of this examination, Wiley and Hilton propose a, “four-part test to determine the extent to which a specific teaching and learning  practice qualifies as OER-enabled pedagogy,” which is outlined as follows:

 

1. Are students asked to  create  new  artifacts  (essays, poems,  videos,  songs,  etc.)  or revise  /  remix existing OER?

 

2. Does the new artifact have value beyond supporting the learning of its author?

 

3. Are students invited to publicly share their new artifacts or revised / remixed OER?

 

4. Are students invited to openly license their new artifacts or revised / remixed OER?

 

When reflecting upon the text as well as the examples presented in the article, I had organized my thoughts to respond to the following questions.

 

What do you think of the test?

 

I think the test presents ways for teachers to think about how assignments and projects can be presented I such a way as to have students think about the broader implications of their learning, in that their learning is not disposable but something that can inspire others, be built upon, and shared with the wider public. I think that this test is simple enough that it can actually be shared with students at the start of a project so as to help them understand the scope of their learning and how their efforts contribute to the wider learning community which they will be engaged with.

 

Do you have examples from your education that would pass all four parts?

 

While I might consider the ways in which my work in the course, Distributed and Open Learning has checked off all four boxes of the OER test, I would like to bring up an example of a math project I had students engage in a few years ago where they were tasked with creating and sharing their very own board game. We began the project by taking a look at the concept of fairness as well as different examples of how to integrate probability and chance into games using spinners, cards, dice, and game mechanics. These different mechanics were introduced to allow students opportunities to use and remix them as part of their board games. Students approached the project knowing that their games were to be designed in a such a way that they would be undergoing changes as a result of feedback and workshopping. We were, in effect, taking on the roles of game makers and our projects allowed us to use what we learned about games and probability to remix original games or mechanics to create something new, share it with our peers, solicit feedback to make changes, and continue with the process until the game was complete. While I feel this project checked off 3 of the 4 boxes of the OER test, the next logical step would be to publish and openly license their works for others to share and remix, which was something I had not considered at the time.

On a different note, a couple of years ago, after I began working in my community as a Circus Arts Educator, I came upon an online community of other Circus Arts Educators who put together an extensive list of games and resources to share and edit publicly. Since many of these circus arts educators worked internationally, they would remix and modify games based on experiences as a result of teaching in different cultural contexts. The list was presented as an editable spreadsheet, where games could be posted, categorized, shared, and remixed. In this way, the game list could grow as new games were created through remixing familiar ones and shared with others who would in turn continue with the process. I feel that this game list would check off all 4 boxes of the OER test, as it allowed for the creation of new artifacts that have value beyond supporting the learner, were able to be shared with other members of the public, and were created with the intention that they would be openly licensed.

To this day, the circus games list continues to grow and receives regular contributions from the circus arts community, which in turn allows for this learning resource to remain relevant to the learning community.

 

If you are planning to become a teacher, will you aim to design tasks that pass all four parts? Why or why not? 

 

I certainly think there are ways to approach creating assignments and projects that support all four parts or tasks of the OER test. I feel this test would work well to inform inquiry projects where students have opportunities to transform their learning through open engagement with classroom and online communities. When students are made aware that their work is going to be shared with the public, it might help them to consider their audience as well as the ways in which they go about remixing ideas and information in their daily experiences to present something new.

 

Do any of the proposed research questions catch your attention?

 

I feel that the first two questions highlight important considerations when designing projects and assignments that support OER practices, as they offer an examination of how students relate to assignments on a personal level as well as how they go about working on the assignments:

 

Do students assigned to create,  revise,  or  remix  artifacts  find  these  assignments  more  valuable, interesting, motivating, or rewarding than other forms of assessment? Why or why not?

 

Do students who make their  assignments publicly  available  demonstrate  greater  mastery  of learning  outcomes  or show  more  enthusiasm  for  their  work  than  students  assigned  traditional assessments? Why or why not?

 

If I were to hypothesize as to the results of these questions, I feel that students would be motivated to show the ways in which they have taken the public audience into consideration through their efforts in creating an OER, as they would come to recognize the ways in which their work reflects their interests and who they are as active participants in their learning. I also feel students would feel more motivated to create, revise, and remix artifacts in order to build a sense of ownership over their product. In these kinds of projects, students normally engage in peer and self-assessment, which allows teachers to incorporate the language of open pedagogy as part of the self-assessment and reflection process. If we were to use the four-part test to inform students about this process, I feel that self-reflection and assessment would yield more in terms of how students approach the assignment or project with open pedagogy in mind.

 

In summary, I feel that practices that support open pedagogy through the integrated use of OERs in classrooms holds a lot of potential in terms of allowing students opportunities to create, remix, revise and share their learning in ways that are motivating and meaningful to them. The use of OERs gives students the freedom to pursue their learning in new and interesting ways and through introducing students to the language of open pedagogy, including the four-part test, we encourage them to become part of a rich and constantly evolving learning community.

 

References:

Wiley, D. & Hilton, J. (2018). Defining OER-enabled Pedagogy. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 19(4).

Our learning pod recently put together a Digital Equity and Perspective Project that examines a fictional persona, a 37 year old woman named Momoko, who is pursuing a degree in the field of graphic design. Our project examines Momoko’s learning characteristics as well as the differences between face-to-face, distributed, and open learning environments, in order to compile a list of strategies and supports that will assist her in reaching her educational goals.

For more details, you may access our project here

I recently read some compelling articles that highlighted the ways in which Open Learning approaches provided opportunities for students to engage in learning communities. The first article entitled, A Guide To Making Textbooks With Students offered some novel ways for students to extend their learning through interacting with Open Educational Resources, or OERs. Since OER’s may be accessed through Creative Commons Licenses, they provide unique opportunities for students to use them in ways that are characterized by what is called the 5 Rs: reused, retained, redistributed, revised, and remixed. This presents opportunities for students to use open access resources to create content, remix and reframe ideas in new ways and for new audiences. I feel that this notion connects with much of what we do as teachers by providing students opportunities to create projects that remix and repurpose concepts to reflect their understanding. However, in a digital learning context, this way of transforming and repurposing knowledge supports the process of extension, whereby students are working with ideas and constructing ideas in such a way as to increase access to their peers and communities. The way in which Open Educational Resources may be built upon or reframed and remixed holds a lot of potential, as student are able to take their learning beyond the confines of closed environments and share it with others, not just amongst their instructors and peers, in new and meaningful ways.

The article, Digital Redlining, Access and Privacy presented a compelling examination of the ways in which restrictive access of educational resources creates challenges and barriers to students and threatens online equity. As someone who enjoys delving into peer-reviewed research using online databases and university libraries, I find restricting student access to specific libraries and online databases is very troublesome, and is something that will eventually lead to the eroding of digital democracy. When I attended university in the United States many years ago, I revelled in the amount of peer-reviewed research that was available to through just a few clicks of a mouse button. Later, when I attended a smaller college in Canada, I was amazed to find how little resources in terms of research was available through their online database. I soon found that this was due to licensing, and that this college library had access to only a few database networks, most of which only featured research from Canadian researchers and not those from the United States. I found this very restrictive, as my research project required global perspectives on issues relating to gender and race. With only a few resources to choose from, I often had to rethink topics or scrap ideas entirely, which was a rather painful exercise that made me reflect on the ways in which licensing can restrict the exploration, transformation, and extension of ideas in learning communities.

Chapter 4 of Design Principles for Indigenous Learning Spaces provided a glimpse into the ways in which learning spaces, physical and digital, are transformed by culture and community. In reflecting on this reading,  I made connections to a local story about a young, indigenous knowledge keeper who used her knowledge of computer skills to document and share the Ktunaxa language to help create the First Voices Indigenous language database. The First Voices database is an example of an Open Learning community that is engaged in the process of cultural restoration and community transformation, which is something that connects very much with the 5 Rs. Through this database, indigenous communities are able to collect and store words and language systems for the purpose of translating and sharing this knowledge with others to ensure their language, history and culture is preserved and restored. It is in this light that I am beginning to see the promise of how Open Learning environments can be used to create opportunities for meaningful change, promote equity and the exchanging of multiple perspectives.

References:

Mays, E. (Ed.). (2017). A guide to making open textbooks with students. Rebus Community.

Gilliard, C., & Culik, H. (2016, May 24). Digital Redlining, Access, and Privacy.Common Sense Education.

Kral, I. & Schwab, R.G. (2012). Chapter 4: Design Principles for Indigenous Learning Spaces. Safe Learning Spaces. Youth, Literacy and New Media in Remote Indigenous Australia. ANU Press. http://doi.org/10.22459/LS.08.2012

When reflecting upon the readings, Openness and Education: A beginner’s guide and Teaching Online : A Guide to Theory, Research, and Practice, I thought it was interesting to see the diversity of arguments presented as educators and researchers attempted to label what we may refer to now as online education and its many different forms. My first experience with online education and blended learning occurred when I first enrolled in university studies after a 10 year hiatus and found that each of my face-to-face courses had some kind of online component, presented through the Moodle platform. My math courses, for example, offered video-taped lectures of my professor presenting the lesson of the day, which students could access at any time. There were, of course, rare occasions where recordings would not turn out right, due to a microphone malfunction or by some fault of the recording technology but for the most part this allowed students who were learning via distance learning or stuck at home with the flu an opportunity to listen to the same lecture that students were seeing in class. After a while, I often wondered why I felt it necessary to spend the time and gas money to attend live lectures but there was something about being there and sitting next to my peers, asking questions of the professor, and engaging in casual small talk that was comforting and motivating. Years later, I enrolled in  100% online courses that featured online group projects, forum discussions, multimedia resources and the like. I paired up with a peer that I knew from my face-to-face courses, as I felt that this connection would be comforting and would increase our productivity. A week or so into our course, communication problems soon began to surface, and my peer and I were the only two members of our online group that were corresponding with one another, as the rest had dropped off or were just busy working on other projects or whatnot. In comparison to the positive experience I had accessing course materials, videos and resources online with blended courses, working through a 100% online course with distant group members was complicated and often messy. When I read the rosy reflections of teachers who facilitate online courses, about how their students have embraced online learning, I tend to think that this isn’t the reality that many students experience. As a student, I have a different perspective regarding the integration of social media and online group projects. I feel that social media integration in the context of learning often feels forced, providing an inauthentic and artificial avenue for engagement and discussion, as there is no time or opportunity to create meaningful social connections; students have to meet deadlines and specific course expectations, including writing a specific number of posts per day, of a certain length, and each having to meet specific criteria for quality. Sometimes professors want an exact number of posts, other times the post has to be 500 or 200 words. This makes online engagement feel less meaningful and organic and more about jumping through hoops within a time limit.

In the article, Teaching Online: A Guide to Theory, Research, and Practice, I was interested to read the perspectives of one professor, Alec Couros, who had reflected on an experience where one of his students shared his musical talents with the class as part of an improvised music performance. Couros wrote, “Open courses provide opportunities and connections that can serve as inspiring supports for students. The serendipity of networks is one of the reasons I’m a huge advocate for openness in course design” (2015, p.79). This kind of interaction is something that provides a glimpse into the unique potential of engaging in online learning, which is the social aspect of sharing and exchanging individual knowledge and expertise amongst diverse members of the student community for the sake of exchange. Providing opportunities for students to share their knowledge with one another in ways that are authentic and not forced is something that I feel creates a climate of learning and cooperation that is lost in many of the designs of online courses. I feel that we need to think carefully about what it means for students to interact with one another in an online space and present opportunities for students to feel engaged in a meaningful way in open learning environments.

 

References:

Johns, Hopkins University Press. (2015). Teaching Online: A Guide to Theory, Research, and Practice. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uvic/detail.action?docID=3318874.

Jordan, K. & Weller, M. (2017). Openness And Education: A Beginner’s Guide. Global OER Graduate Network. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320840206_Jordan_K_Weller_M_2017_Openness_and_Education_A_beginners%27_guide_Global_OER_Graduate_Network

As I was conducting research into ways to promote equity, I came across an article by the education blogger, John Spencer, entitled: Empowering Students in Distance Learning Environments. As a teacher who has had the experience of transitioning a class from a face-to-face to a blended learning environment, I was curious to read another educator’s perspective on how to increase online engagement, especially in a modern context. In the article, Spencer highlights the challenges of maintaining engagement with students, including instances when students do not show up for optional or required class meetings. Spencer argues that this kind of lack of interaction between teachers and peers in an online learning environment is due to a lack of focus and commitment, much of which comes as a natural consequence of learning in a home environment as opposed to a classroom environment. In a classroom environment, focus,  attention, and engagement can be monitored and sustained. At the home, frequent distractions, irregular schedules, and technical issues notwithstanding (family members hogging the wifi) students feel as though their productivity is stifled. Spencer states simply, “every home is different” and therefore, as teachers, we must think about how to improve our practice by focussing on equity and empathy. Spencer then goes on to suggest the following tips for teachers to promote access and equity when taking learning online:

Provide Access to Technology – this includes signing out laptops and providing mobile hotspots.

Provide Tutorials for Technology – Not all students know how to use technology for purposes outside entertainment. Things like accessing YouTube links or uploading assignments to a digital portfolio are all skills that should be taught.

Keep in Touch with Families – This allows teachers and families to make plans for how to establish routines and solutions for taking learning online.

Be Flexible with Deadlines and Missed Work – Model empathy. Every family is different and finding solutions that work for each student is necessary.

Pay Attention to Power Dynamics – Digital spaces are not socially neutral. Paying attention to things like power and race in online environments is an aspect of an equitable learning environment.

Be Sure to Provide Linguistic Support – Consider adaptations for learners who are not native English speakers and may be continuing to learn the language. Providing access to language support promotes equity and increases engagement.

Embrace Universal Access & Universal Design Mindset: Teachers should consider what kinds of technology is available to engage students with disabilities, such as ensuring closed captioning is enabled for YouTube videos, lectures, and presentations. Consulting a librarian or tech specialist can provide teachers with tools and recommendations with how to assist teachers with setting up these kinds of supports.

Additionally, Spencer also provides tips for promoting student empowerment, including providing flexibility with online assignments, tapping into students’ interests, letting students chase their curiosity, and selecting moments to present less choice in favour of higher engagement in assignments.

I feel that these tips would go a long way toward promoting student engagement in digital learning environments. It is ultimately up to teachers on how to proceed with designing online learning experiences they feel their students would be engaged in however I feel that these recommendations provide a lot of good considerations on how to get started.

References:

Spencer, J. (2020, April 28). Empowering Students In Distance Learning Environments. John Spencer. Retrieved August 8, 2021 from https://spencerauthor.com/empower-distance-learning/

Hello and welcome to my blog!

My name is Jerrod and I am a teacher living in the East Kootenays.

Over the past 2 years, I have enjoyed working as a teacher and love to learn something new every day.

My favourite subjects include outdoor education, drama education, visual art, music, and science. Sometimes I like to integrate all of them together!

Thanks for checking out my blog, I am looking forward to sharing my perspectives on teaching and some of the incredible things I have learned along the way.

Cheers!

There was a variety of information presented throughout the readings but the article, Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: twenty-first century student sorting and tracking by Priscilla M. Regan and Jolene Jessepresented a fascinating examination of the ethical uses of education technology and the importance of teaching students the value of digital citizenship.

This made me think about ways that teachers could use the BC Core Competencies to have students reflect upon their competencies in the areas of digital citizenship. Part of the reason why the Core Competencies are such an important component of the BC Curriculum is that they outline the kinds of skills students will carry with them beyond their school experience.

Years ago, when I was first introduced to computer technologies in school, we did not have much instruction as to how to protect our personal information in online spaces or the consequences of accepting user license agreements. Much of what I have come to understand about digital citizenship and online privacy came as a result of learning about it during my first couple of years in University, when social media was commonly being used to connect with peers and other school networks. I also learned a lot through experiencing the many ways in which the use of technology has impacted my way of life. Even today, I feel I have a complicated relationship with technology, which affects how I approach using it in the classroom.

However, I feel that exploring the Core Competencies in a digital context may present opportunities for students to reflect upon their relationship with technology and how they use it in their daily lives. An example may include students researching the ways technology has changed the way people communicate through apps like Twitter and TicTok, which each occupy a unique communication landscape. Critical and creative thinking can be explored through an examination of how digital tools and software can offer new ways to design projects and experiments. Students could also examine how online social media profiles reflect a part of their personal and social identity.

As students are becoming more accustomed to navigating different technologies, I feel it is critical to be more mindful of our own relationships with technology so that we may begin a dialogue as to how this relationship impacts our lives in the areas of communication, critical and creative thinking, and our personal and social identities.

 

References:

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2021). Core Competencies. Province of BC. Retrieved August 1, 2021 from https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/competencies

Regan, P., & Jesse, J. (2019). Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and personalized learning: Twenty-first century student sorting and tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167-179. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2