2 Matching Annotations
- Mar 2020
-
docs.google.com docs.google.com
-
I chose all my scholarly journals, I put them together. I chose some YouTube videos; they were –IF: Mm-hmm.CF: – like, a bunch of TED talks.
Compiling research materials.
Is there room for us to think about the iterative process; can we work with instructors to "reward" (or assign) students to alternate the searching, reading and writing.
-
And – And I seen how – I saw how many, um, scholarly journals or how many sources came up for it, right? Um, number of sources. Right. And then, if I – if I felt like it wasn’t enough for me to thoroughly talk about the topic, I would move on. Right? So, when I did segregation, there – like, I guess, like, my specific topic was modern-day, so there wasn’t really much about it. Right? So, not much info. Right? And then, when I did gentrification, there were a lot, right?
This part of the process is interesting to me. Links topic selection to search (seemingly a single search).
It also seems a little misguided. What can we do in our lessons that could make tiny changes to this attitude?
-