EDD 7914 Technology Integrated Teaching and Learning Pegi Flynt

Transcription

1 EDD 7914 Technology Integrated Teaching and Learning Pegi Flynt Assignment #5 Integrating Emerging Technology into the Curriculum-ASSURE Lesson Plan Dr. Shirley Walrod Assignment Due Date July 25, 2010 Submitted July 25, 2010 Nova Southeastern University

2 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 2 Assignment #5 Integrating Emerging Technology into the Curriculum-ASSURE Lesson Plan Abstract When designing instruction, the ASSURE model (Smaldino, Lowther, & Russell, 2008) encourages a purposeful look at emerging technologies and student engagement. In this paper the writer uses the ASSURE model to design a lesson plan for a graduate level course in educational technology (EDUC 531). The plan is based on the writer s assessment of the course using the Technology Integration Matrix (TIM). This tool helps educators evaluate the integration of technology in curriculum. The goals of the lesson will be to design authentic learning experiences where learners collaborate to examine important issues and determine solutions. To do this, the author will show how Structured Controversy can be used in a distance environment. In order to collect data and evaluate the effectiveness of the lesson, learners will be asked to complete an online survey at the conclusion of the lesson. This writer has included all items listed in the rubric for this assignment and believes that overall it is at a level of Excellent.

3 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 3 Structured Controversy in a Distance Environment The ASSURE model for instructional design encourages a purposeful look at emerging technologies (Smaldino, Lowther, & Russell, 2008). The writer teachers a graduate level course in educational technology (EDUC 531) designed to equip in-service graduate level teachers with the technology skills needed for today s k-12 classrooms and learners. The course is taught through a distance model using Blackboard as the course management system (CMS). The National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) are a significant focus of the course. On careful examination of the Technology Integration Matrix (TIM), this writer compared the level of integration and engagement typically experienced during instruction and learning experiences in EDUC 531 with those presented in the TIM and was challenged to design authentic learning experiences where learners collaborate to examine important issues, identify problems that may result from issues, and determine how technology can be used in and out of the classroom to help co-construct solutions. The area identified as the goal for future this lesson plan spans four environments identified on the TIM: collaborative, constructive, authentic and goal directed. Jonassen (1996) refers to technology tools as intellectual partners (p. 9) that aid learners as they seek to expand their thinking and understanding. Due to technological advances and interactive capabilities, the internet can provide an environment to foster collaborative learning (Hazari, 2004). Digital technologies can facilitate students and teachers in the collaboration process regardless of time and location in distance education courses. Collaboration, enabled by digital technologies, can aid learners as they reflect, dialogue, and revise in meaningful ways (Garrison & Archer, 2007). The writer contends that lesson planning for EDUC 531 can include instructional strategies that will incorporate the

4 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 4 highest level of technology integration and student engagement, while demonstrating the transformative power of technology. The writer chose structured controversy as an instructional strategy to model how critical thinking can be developed in distance courses through the use of communication and information technologies available through the Internet. Controversy is a type of academic conflict that exists when the views or ideas of one person based on experience or evidence are at odds with those of another. Structured controversy is a process through which teams of four work collaboratively to reach consensus after examining different perspectives on an important social issue (Johnson & Johnson, 1988). Omelicheva (2006) states that educational debate requires teamwork that fosters the skills of collaboration and through interaction with their peers, students can gain invaluable insights into issues (p. 174). Johnson and Johnson (1989) conducted a meta-analysis on found that structured controversy results in improved critical thinking, greater retention of content, increased decision making skills, increased creativity, stronger social bonds, and a greater commitment to problem-solving. Johnson and Johnson (1988) state that using academic conflicts for instructional purposes is one of the most dynamic yet least-used teaching strategies (p. 58). Budesheim and Lundquist (2000) point out that the consider-the-opposite strategy, where students research and present opposing positions, helps to reduce or even eliminate bias and assumptions. A number of researchers present the steps to structured controversy: 1. Determine and develop the issue. The first step in structured controversy is to identify an issue with opposing views. The issue should be connected to the curriculum being studied and can be generated by the learners or by the teacher. The teacher (or students) research and provide a definition of the issue with a summary of the key arguments supporting the two positions. A list of additional resource materials (including a bibliography) is generated that will provide evidence each side of the issue.

5 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 5 2. Establish teams. To maximize the opportunity for different perspectives being represented and increase the interest level in the argument, the teacher assigns heterogeneous teams of four: teachers should consider personality, sex, attitude, background, social class, reasoning strategies, experience level, ability level, and learning styles. Teams are then split into two pairs. Pairs research are assigned opposing positions on the controversy. 3. Research a position. Each pair seeks information to effectively support their assigned position effectively. Prior knowledge and experience can be called upon, but new resources materials must be utilized to document evidence supporting their position. Pairs then plan a persuasive presentation to share with the other pair. 4. Present position. Each pair presents its position with supporting evidence, being as persuasive as possible. The opposite pair listens, takes notes, and asks questions in a nonadversarial manner. The goal is to understand, not debate. Teams are cautioned to avoid assumptions, and identify and eliminate bias and fallacy. 5. Reverse positions. Using the notes taken in step 4, each pair prepares to advocate for the reverse position by maximizing the best of, playing off the weaknesses of, and research what was missing from the previous arguments. The strongest reasons and evidence from the opposing presentation can be built on and new information added. Each pair makes a second presentation, this time from the opposite perspective. 6. Reach a conclusion. In this stage, learners act as a team of four to discuss and reach consensus, examining the merits of all arguments, summarizing and synthesizing the most compelling evidence for each point of view. Teams are cautioned to change their own position when the facts and the rationale clearly indicate that you should do so. The experience of presenting both sides of the position encourages each person to be as objective and open minded as possible. At this point each team member may share and revisit his or her own initial perspective. When consensus is reached, the team prepares a report where they present their conclusion with rationale and supporting evidence. This is shared with the entire class. 7. Debrief the process. The focus of the debriefing should be on the process. How well did the team function in reaching consensus on the issue? How can they improve? (Johnson & Johnson, 1988; Omelicheva, 2006; Rossi, 2006; Steiner, Brzuzy, Gerdes, & Hurdle, 2003; Steiner, Stromwall, Brzuzy, & Gerdes, 1999; Wareham, Elefsiniotis & Elms, 2006).

6 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 6 The ASSURE Model was used to create a lesson on Structured Controversy (Smaldino et al., 2008, p. 86). The A in ASSURE stands for Analyze Learners. Here, teachers consider learner characteristics such as learning styles and the knowledge, skills and attitudes the learner has generated around the topic. The learners for the lesson on structured controversy are enrolled in a distance learning course. These learners are all in-service teachers taking a graduate level course in educational technology as part of a master s program. The learners are comfortable with technology but have little experience using collaboration tools supported by digital technologies in a distance environment. Further, the learners have little knowledge of or experience with developing critical thinking skills through argument, especially in a distance environment. Learners demonstrate a willingness to participate in teams with the goal of experiencing structured controversy. As part of the course, learners will use the Blackboard Discussion Board, the video conferencing tool Adobe Connect, and a class wiki. A tutorial has been created to that goes over the steps needed to access and use Adobe Connect to collaborate live as a team, and how to set up an account and use the wiki. The S stands for State Standards and Objectives. The goals of this lesson include: a) Modeling the instruction strategy called structured controversy b) Demonstrating how structured controversy can be used in a distance environment c) Using technology to collaborate with peers in a distance environment d) Using technology to construct, share, and publish knowledge e) Using technology tools to facilitate problem solving activities f) Engaging in metacognitive activities at a level that would be unattainable without the support of technology tools The standards for this lesson are taken from the National Educational Technology Standards (NETS-T) and Performance Indicators for Teachers T_Standards_Final.pdf 1. Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity Teachers use their knowledge of subject matter, teaching and learning, and technology to facilitate experiences that advance student learning, creativity, and innovation in both face-to-face and virtual environments. Teachers: b. engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources

7 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 7 c. promote student reflection using collaborative tools to reveal and clarify students conceptual understanding and thinking, planning, and creative processes d. model collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning wit students, colleagues, and others in face-to-face and virtual environments The objectives for this lesson are: 1) Learners will understand and be able to state the steps in structured controversy. 2) Learners will be able to articulate the advantages of using structured controversy in the classroom. 3) Learners will use communication technologies to work collaboratively in a distance environment. 4) Learners in a distance environment will function in teams of 4 to examine an issue of social importance and, through the use of structured controversy, supported by technology, will reach consensus on the issue. 5) Learners will construct a persuasive presentation with supporting evidence and publish it to a class wiki. The second S stands for Select Strategies, Technology, Media, and Materials. In the EDUC 531 course, learners regularly use the CMS Discussion Board and Adobe Connect and a class wiki. A tutorial has been created to that goes over the steps needed to created a Google account, access and use Adobe Connect to collaborate live as a team, and set up an account in, and use the wiki. Students are familiar with and have used each of these tools before this lesson is introduced. Prior to this lesson, all learners have been required to go through the Adobe Connect tutorial and verify that they have a working microphone. The tutorial is available at The lesson will use the instructional strategy Structured Controversy. The controversial issue is: What is the best way to create jobs in the U.S.? Should the government continue to pass economic stimulus packages, or are such measures ineffective at reducing unemployment? A video available on YouTube will be utilized as the Trigger for the issue. Learners will work in teams of four during the structured controversy. Goals of the lesson include modeling the instruction strategy structured controversy and demonstrating how structured controversy can be used in a distance environment. Teams are assigned, each with four members. Team members will use the EDUC 531 Discussion board to communicate and collaborate in the distance environment. Team members must check the Discussion board and respond to posts daily.

8 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 8 Prior to the beginning of the lesson, the instructor will hold a required LIVE session for the whole class using Adobe Connect. Learners will access the live room by clicking on the link provided on the home page of the EDUC 531 course. During this session the instructor will go over each of the following aspects of the lesson: The importance of critical thinking, The purpose of structured controversy, How the structured controversy will work, How communication will take place, How to locate, save and upload needed documents, What the team assignments are, How teams will function, What the final project will look like, and How teams and members will be evaluated. The U stands for Utilize Technology, Media and Materials. Step 1: At least 1 day prior to the lesson beginning, #1 (through the EDUC 531 course site) will be sent to all team members with instructions that one person in the for member team will be the manager during the structured controversy lesson. The team manager is responsible to coordinate team meetings and inform the instructor of any problems with the team. The manager will be the team member whose birthday is FURTHEST away from date of . Step 2: Day 1 of the lesson #2 will be sent to all team members with the following link Students will View video of Obama sharing need for economic stimulus. Step 3: Day 2 of the lesson #3 will be sent to all team members with the issue statement. The issue: What is the best way to create jobs in the U.S.? Should the government continue to pass economic stimulus packages, or are such measures ineffective at reducing unemployment? Also included in #3 are instructions for EACH team member to write their position with two supporting reasons. These reasons can be general in nature and do not have to be grounded in a basis. Team members then post their position in the discussion board.

9 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 9 Before the end of Day 2, team members must post their positions to the discussion board. The team manager and all team members must agree NOT to view the positions of other team mates until he or she has posted his or her own position. Each person s initial position will be revisited at the conclusion of the lesson. Step #3: Day 3 of the lesson #4 will be sent to all team members with a link to the article "Job Creation" available at the following link: Structured controversy calls for two team members to take one side of the issue and the other two to take the opposing position. The first two team members that POSTED to the Discussion board on Day 2 will take the view of Supporters and the last two to post on Day 2 will take the view of Critics. Supporters of the Democratic job creation plan say: The economic stimulus package passed in 2009 has been successful in ending the recession and prompting an economic recovery. If the government does not spend money to create jobs now, the economy may slip into a more severe recession, jeopardizing the nation's long-term prospects. Critics of the Democratic job creation plan say: The private sector should be responsible for creating jobs; there is little the government can do to create lasting employment for Americans. The 2009 stimulus has not been effective enough; tax cuts would be a better way to stimulate the economy. All team members are to read the article as part of the Exploration phase of the lesson (see tab on Excel document) and look for facts or information that will support the assigned position on the issue.

10 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 10 A guided reflection sheet may be used to aid learners in researching their assigned perspective. 1. The issue for discussion is. 2. The position I have been assigned on the issue is. 3. One reason in support of the position is. 4. One piece of evidence that backs up this reason is. 5. A second reason in support of the position is. 6. One piece of evidence that backs up the second reason is. 7. A third reason in support of the position is. 8. One piece of evidence that backs up the third reason is. 9. Those against this position might say. 10. I would reply to their reasoning by saying. On Day 4 the team will meet live using Adobe Connect by clicking on the link provided on the home page of the EDUC 531 course. Prior to meeting, teammate pairs will each prepare an outline with the points they will present supporting their assigned position. Pairs will have exactly 3 minutes each (6 minutes total per side) to present their position and supporting evidence. This will be done verbally and a single PowerPoint slide can be used but is not required. The team assigned the Supporters position will go first and the team with the Critics position will present last. Guidelines for Presenters Presenters clearly state and defend their position on the issue. Presenters demonstrate an accurate and in-depth understanding of the issue. Presenters use information to do two or more of the following: draw conclusions, use logic, give examples, generate new ideas, make analogies, recognize contradictions (Adapted from Rossi, 2006, p. 116).

11 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 11 Structured Controversy Rules During the two sessions of structured controversy, all members will abide by the following rules: 1. Show value and respect for each person. 2. All proposed solutions to the problem must rest on factual evidence, previous knowledge and experience, and logical reasoning; emotional responses unsubstantiated by logical decision making will not be allowed. 3. The goal is not to win but to reach consensus with the best conclusion possible. You are participating in order to learn more about the issue. 4. Be critical of ideas and supportive of people. 5. One person speaks at a time. Listen to all ideas. 6. There is absolutely no interrupting by any side when the other side has the floor. You may take notes on what is being presented on another perspective. 7. If you are unclear on a point, restate what was said. You may ask questions to address points that are unclear but only when it is your turn to speak. 8. Please thank each speaker as they finish speaking. 9. A timer must be appointed for each session and time frames strictly adhered to. 10. Focus is on the points or arguments made, not on the person making them. 11. You are allowed to refer to your reading material, keeping in mind you have only 6 minutes per pair to present your arguments. 12. Each person on each side of the issue must speak at least once in each round. 13. Once the structured controversy (two sessions) is over, the concluding discussion session is informal (adapted from D Eon & Proctor, 2001, p. 253; Johnson & Johnson, 1988, p. 63). Step #4: Day 4 of the lesson, teams will meet at an agreed upon time in the live meeting room through Adobe Connect. Each team member must have a functioning microphone to communicate (Note: As part of the EDUC 531 course, connectivity and working microphone of each learner was established and confirmed). The Supporters will present their position and supporting evidence. Listening pair will take notes on what was presented and ask questions to clarify anything they did not understand. Pairs then switch and Critics present while the other pair takes notes.

12 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 12 Guided Response Sheet You have been presented with two sides of an issue and will be presenting evidence for one side. In preparation for hearing the opposing view, list the questions you will ask the presenters when they try to persuade you. Ask challenging questions that show what you already know about the issue. Make sure your questions are balanced and do not show favoritism (Adapted from Rossi, 2006, p. 118) Concluding the live session, the manager will lead the team in identifying questions that still exist or have arisen as a result of the presentations. The team will then decide what information may still be needed to answer questions. Team members will choose or be assigned to seek knowledge from the additional resources list (Note: Members may also seek knowledge from resources they are aware of that are not listed). Pairs SWITCH positions and seek additional information. Additional Resource List (Links will be available for each team in the Discussion Board) Key Events in the Recent History of Job Creation Where Will the Jobs Be in the Future? President Obama's Remarks on Signing the HIRE Act By the Numbers: Job Creation Economic Recession Subprime Mortgage Crisis Economic Stimulus Package Economic Rescue Plan Future of U.S. Manufacturing

13 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 13 Economy: March Jobless Rate Steady, But Hiring Jumps (2010) Legislation: Obama Signs $18 Billion Jobs Bill (2010) Economy: Unemployment Rate Hit 10.2% in October (2009) GDP Grew 3.5% in Third Quarter; Aided by Federal Stimulus Spending (2009) U.S. President Obama Signs $787 Billion Economic Recovery Package Into Law...Mix of Tax Cuts, Spending to Boost Growth (2009) World Almanac: Employment: Employment and Unemployment in the U.S., World Almanac: Employment: U.S. Unemployment Rates by Selected Characteristics, World Almanac Encyclopedia: Business Cycle World Almanac Encyclopedia: Social Security World Almanac Encyclopedia: Unemployment Research Feature: A Look at Labor Research Feature: The Subprime Mortgage Crisis Research Feature: The Economic Downturn: From Credit Crunch to Global Recession Editorial Opinion: Unemployment Rate Passes Ten Percent Facts On George W. Bush Facts On Barack Obama Step #5: Day 5 of the lesson each team member will do further research from additional resources, but on the opposite position from the first one they were assigned. The pair that was the Supporters now takes the position of the Critics and the Critics take on the position of the Supporters. Again, pairs are to look for facts or information that will support the assigned position on the issue and prepare an outline with the points they will present supporting the opposite position. Pairs will have exactly 3 minutes each (6 minutes total per side) to present their position and supporting evidence and a single PowerPoint slide may be used but is not required. Step #6: Day 6 of the lesson, teams will meet at an agreed upon time in the live meeting room through Adobe Connect. The new Supporters will present their position and supporting evidence. Listening pair will take notes on what was presented. Pairs then

14 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 14 switch and the new Critics present while the other pair takes notes. At the conclusion of this session teams seek consensus. Step #7: Day 7 of the lesson, each person on the team will individually evaluate the evidence and reach a conclusion. A reflection tool with guiding questions is provided to aid in this process. Guided Conclusion Tomorrow, you will meet as a team and reach consensus on the issue. Reflect on the evidence and be prepared to share your conclusion. 1. After evaluating the reasons and evidence presented by both advocates, I have decided that. 2. The reasons and/or evidence that most influenced my decision, in order of importance, are: a. b. c. d. 3. Those against this position might say. 4. I will reply to their reasoning by saying. Step #8: Day 8 of the lesson, the team will meet live a final time and reach consensus on the issue. Any solution must be agreed upon by all members of the group and must show evidence of some degree of benefit for all members of the group (Bevevino, Dengel & Adams, 1999, p. 276 ). Teams will collaborate on producing the final product that reveals their agreed upon conclusion. This product will then be uploaded to the class wiki. Step #9: Day 9 of the lesson learners will revisit their own initial position and reflect on whether their initial position changed and why or why not. They will also be encouraged to reflect on the critical thinking skills and dispositions they brought to the experience. Step #10: Day 10 of the lesson, the entire class will meet in a live session on Adobe Connect to debrief the experience and share what was gained through the process. The R stands for Require Learner Participation.

15 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 15 Teams will use the discussion board and Adobe Connect to collaborate on the issue. Each person must function within a team and make connection through , discussion board and/ or Adobe Connect each day of the lesson. Points are given for daily participation. The E stands for Evaluate and Revise. The culminating activity of the lesson requires each team to create a presentation that clearly states the consensus the team reached on the issue. The presentation must include a final conclusion statement, supporting evidence, and a statement that all team members agree. The presentation will be done in MS Word and a link to the document will be placed on the class wiki. The instructor will evaluate the effectiveness of the lesson by asking each learner to complete a survey generated in Google Docs and available at Q Structured Controversy Survey Please use the following 5-point scale in replying to each question. 1.Strongly Disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neither Agree or Disagree, 4. Agree 5. Strongly Agree 1. I enjoyed the structured controversy experience. 2. This experience helped me to realize that there were valid points of view on both sides of the issue. 3. I learned a great deal from what other students had to say about the issue. 4. I changed my initial view as a result of the experience. 5. I found it worthwhile to be able to express my opinion. 6. I found it worthwhile to take one side of the issue and then the other. 7. I found it worthwhile to listen to the opinions of others. 8. Changing sides in Round 2 helped maintain my interest. 9. I found it worthwhile to hear what others thought of my opinion. 10. I learned from arguing the side of the resolution that was different from my own (adapted from D Eon, Proctor & Reeder, 2007, p. 35). Once learners complete the survey, all data will be collected on a spreadsheet in Google Docs for review. The data will be examined and the lesson revised based on the feedback from the learners.

16 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 16 References Bevevino, M., Dengel, J., & Adams, K. (1999). Constructivist theory in the classroom. Clearing House, 72(5), 275. Budesheim, T. L., & Lundquist, A. R. (2000). Consider the opposite: Opening minds through inclass debates on course-related controversies. Teaching of Psychology, 26, Childress, M., & Braswell, R. (2006). Using massively multiplayer online role playing games for online learning. Distance Education, 27(2), D'Eon, M., & Proctor, P. (2001). An innovative modification to structured controversy. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 38(3), D Eon, M., Proctor, P., & Reeder, B. (2007). Comparing two cooperative small group formats used with physical therapy and medical students. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 44(1), doi: / Driscoll, M. P. (1993). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2007). A community of inquiry framework for online learning. In M. Moore & W.G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (2nd Edition). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1). Retrieved July 17, 2009 from Hazari, S. (2004). Strategy for assessment of online course discussions. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(4), Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R. T. (1988). Critical thinking through structured controversy. Educational Leadership, 45, Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company. Jonassen, D. (2005). Design of constructivist learning environments. Retrieved December 30, 2006, from Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the Classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Klemm, W. R. (2002). Forum for case study learning: Analyzing research reports in a computer conferencing environment. Retrieved on June 18, 2010 from

17 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 17 Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experiences as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lim, K., & Wang, J. (2005). Collaborative handheld gaming in education. Educational Media International, 42(4), Mayes, T. (2001) Learning technology and learning relationships, in J. Stephenson (Ed.) Teaching and learning online (London, Kogan Page), chapter 2, 16. Meyers, R., & Johnson, J. (2008). Facilitating the design of a campus leadership team. Communication Education, 57(4), Omelicheva, M. (2006). Global politics on trial: Using educational debate for teaching controversies of world affairs. International Studies Perspectives, 7(2), Palincsar, A., & Herrenkohl, L. (2002). Designing Collaborative Learning Contexts. Theory Into Practice, 41(1), 26. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Converging conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, Rossi, J. (2006). The dialogue of democracy. Social Studies, 97(3), Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., & Russell, J. D. (2008). Instructional technology and media for learning (9th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Steiner, S., Brzuzy, S., Gerdes, K., & Hurdle, D. (2003). Using structured controversy to teach diversity content and cultural competence. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 23(1/2), Steiner, S., Stromwall, L., Brzuzy, S., & Gerdes, K. (1999). Using cooperative learning strategies in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(2), Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), Veerman, A. & Veldguis-Diermanse, E. (n.d.). Collaborative learning through computermediated communication in academic education. Retrieved on June 17, 2010 from Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

18 Flynt-A5-ASSURE 18 Wareham, D., Elefsiniotis, T., & Elms, D. (2006). Introducing ethics using structured controversies. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(6), Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.