Project #2

TOPIC

We have identified types of schools at both the K-12 level and at the college level, and we have identified how those types of schools are related to socioeconomic classes. Our readings have emphasized that classifications are built on assumptions.  While assumptions are unavoidable in any classification system, we are obligated to examine the values and beliefs behind them. To do this, we have examined ACT ENGAGE system for predicting student success.  We have characterized ENGAGE by comparing it with our own -- and other students' -- notions of what determines success in college. Throughout these readings and discussions, we have recognized the need to assess the legitimacy of the claims made by ACT about ENGAGE. Thus, we have returned to questions of expertise, peer review, and credibility, and we have used them to discuss the readings below:

_____________________________________


INTRODUCTORY READINGS

• The College Board. "Types of Colleges: the basics."

Jean Anyon's "Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work": HERE


• Shaun Johnson, "Why America's Prep Schools Aren't Following Arne Duncan's Public School Education Reforms"  


• Jose Ferreria, "Education Datapalooza"


• ACT on ENGAGE: HERE  

         note: be sure to explore all links on the site, especially the ENGAGE for college students


• Comparison chapter (see "Modes" link at top of page, and read "Comparison" chapter)



Annotated Bibliography

Using what you've learned about searching for for information, you identified three sources that  helped you to think critically about key terms such as  "learning analytics," "digital redlining," "quantified self," and "student success." Some of you turned to www.re-think.us for important terminology. You created three annotated biblographic entries that enable you to better assess the research supporting the claims of ACT about ENGAGE.

All annotated bibliographies will be posted HERE.

_____________________________________


ASSIGNMENT

Begin by identifying three valuable resources that help assess the claims that ACT makes about ENGAGE.  On a separate line in your citation, name the search engine, database, or other tool you used to locate the source. List your search terms. Follow the Purdue OWL's guideline for annotated bibliographies, and email them to me for posting above.

Then, using these resources and your other readings about peer review, you will assess the credibility of the claims ACT makes about ENGAGE.  Evaluate the nature of the research upon which they are based, and the values that are revealed in the categories it uses.  Note that this is not a pro/con paper.  You are evaluating the strength and nature of the evidence that supports a claim.

To do this assignment, you will complete TEQ Sheets, annotated bibliographic entries, write a Purpose & Problem Statement, and write a Prospectus with at least five citations. The Prospectus will be no longer than two pages including citations.


Tips:  For an example of how a student developed a good question, read his email exchange with his professor: HERE.

_____________________________________


DELIVERABLES

1. TEQ Sheets for Anyon, Johnson

2. Three (3) annotated bibliographic entries for credible sources that help assess the validity of the ACT ENGAGE. Entries will be posted HERE.

3. Purpose & Problem Statement

4. Prospectus. The Prospectus must have at least five citations other than the sources provided in the Introductory Readings and a works cited page. The Prospectus will be no longer than two pages including the works cited. It must use MLA formats.

_____________________________________

Other Requirements

NOTE 1: The documents should avoid any form of the verb, "to be."  Examples of this verb include "am," "is," "are," "was," "were," "being," "been." These verbs are vague, and  they often seem to claim that one thing is another thing.  Papers using any form of "to be" often receive reduced grades..

NOTE 2: The paper may not use second person ("you" or "your")  Any paper using second person will not be accepted.  The paper not use "one" as a substitute for second person.

NOTE 3: First person ("I") is acceptable only at the sentences that state your own, most important insight, question, or hypothesis.