Practicing what we teach.

Brown, Roger. A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1973; pp. xx+437. $15.00.

Emig, Janet. The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders. Urbana, Ill.: NCTE, 1971; pp. 151. $3.00.

O'Hare, Frank. Sentence Combining: Improving Student Writing without Formal Grammar Instruction. Urbana, Ill.: NCTE, 1971; pp. 108. $2.50.

Young, Richard E. and Frank Koen. The Tagmemic Discovery Procedure: An Evaluation of its Uses in the Teaching of Rhetoric. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan, n.d.; pp. 69+.     

The significance of humanistic rhetoric in British public address

This study sought to answer the following questions: (1) What specific verbal and nonverbal behaviors are associated with the initiation of communicative interactions; and (2) Do these verbal and nonverbal behaviors vary according to the degree of acquaintanceship of the participants in the greeting situation.     

Are contextual and designed student–student interaction treatments equally effective in distance education?

This systematic review draws from and builds upon the results of a meta-analysis of the achievement effects of three types of interaction treatments in distance education: student–student, student–teacher, and student–content (Bernard et al., Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243–1289, 2009). This follow-up study considers two forms of student–student interaction treatments, contextual interaction and designed interaction. Typical contextual interaction treatments contain the necessary conditions for student–student interaction to occur, but are not intentionally designed to create collaborative learning environments. By contrast, designed interaction treatments are intentionally implemented collaborative instructional conditions for increasing student learning. Our meta-analysis compared the effect of these two types of interaction treatments on student achievement outcomes. The results favored designed interaction treatments over contextual interaction treatments. Examples of designed interaction treatments and a discussion of study results and their potential implications for research and instruction in distance education and online learning are presented.     

Whither thee, Educational Technology? Suggesting a Critical Expansion of Our Epistemology for Emerging Leaders

It is possible that some outdated ideas about ‘management’ in our field are constraining our preparation of new educational technologists to lead education organizations in the Knowledge Age? This paper takes an interdisciplinary stance to examine educational administration, education technology and complexivist thinking about leadership in our field. It begins with a critical analysis using one of six educational leadership/administration knowledge “contexts” - leadership vs. management - to unpack our field’s existing position on the topic (English, 2011). For parsimony, the other five contexts are mentioned briefly throughout this paper: (2) organizing and institutions and (3) Policy and governance. (4) Finance and Human Resources; (5) Change and Innovation and (6) Learning and technology. Other articles in this Special Edition of Tech Trends testify that outstanding, effective leadership exists in small, medium and large organizations every day around the world because of educational technologists doing amazing work in various contexts. This article suggests a frame for expanding our field’s epistemology for in-program and emerging educational technologists to build their capability to lead organizations that learn in a Knowledge Age.