The Flourishing Academic

A blog for teacher-scholars published by the Duquesne University Center for Teaching Excellence

Leave a comment


thank you

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles,

Happy teacher appreciation week and happy summer break! The Flourishing Academic will be taking the summer off and returning at the start of the fall semester to welcome the new academic year with all of you.

In honor of teacher appreciation week I wanted to say a special thank you to all of the teacher-scholar writers that have made this first year of our blog a success! Thank you for the diversity and depth of perspectives and ideas you shared with all of us. It’s been both inspiring and fun to work with each of you.

Jeryl Benson
Danielle St. Hilaire
Susan Hines
Steven Hansen
Leslie Lewis
Rachel Luckenbill
Jessica McCort
Michael McGravey
Jerry Minsinger
Elizabeth Pask
James Purdy
Cheryl Read
Erin Rentschler
Allie Reznik
Heather Rusiewicz
Matthew Srnec
Sarah Wallace
Laurel Willingham-McLain
Richard “Lanny” Wilson

We’ve published 41 posts on a variety of topics related to teaching and learning and our authors are TAs, faculty, and staff from nine different departments and offices across campus with one guest writer from another university. We are truly blessed to have had such robust participation from a strong and innovative teaching community.

A big thanks also to the rest of The Flourishing Academic blogging staff: Mike McGravey (editor), Laurel Willingham-McLain (content editor), Steven Hansen (content editor) and Erin Rentschler (content editor) for making the machine run smoothly!

I wish you all a refreshing summer!
Rachel Luckenbill, Lead Editor for The Flourishing Academic



Breaking the Glass Slipper

By Dr. Jessica McCort, Instructor of Writing in the English Department, Duquesne University

breaking glass

Image courtesy of

Recently, I have become deeply invested in fostering my students’ ability to question the world around them, particularly the received messages that they tend to accept blindly rather than interrogate. This past semester, for example, in each of the classes I taught, we studied the written versions of different fairy tales with an eye to the fact that these stories are constantly evolving and changing based on the culture that is telling them. As one of the first written assignments for the semester, I asked my students to analyze a specific tale before they came into class to discuss it. I was once again struck, as I am every time I do this exercise, by how much students want to stick to the messages they have learned to associate with these stories, even when the words that are directly in front of them on the page contradict what they recall.

Let’s take “Cinderella,” for example, the tale my students were supposed to examine. I had asked them to read a translation of Charles Perrault’s version of the tale after our careful close reading of several different versions of “Little Red Riding Hood” and how the messages purveyed by each specific tale related directly to the culture out of which that particular version had evolved. Still, I got lots of reflection papers asserting that “Cinderella” is a “rags to riches” story in which the family’s poor, lowly housemaid “pulls herself up by her bootstraps” in order to become a princess; that the “charm” Cinderella has is that she’s such a kind person and that this is why she ascends in her social position by the story’s end.

In the version of the tale my students had read, Cinderella is not always just a lowly housemaid. She is the daughter of a gentleman, a girl who was knocked out of her rightful place in the social order by a stepmother who was a little nervous about her and her biological daughters’ place in the household. The tale has a lot to do with how blood will win out, how you can’t try to rearrange the social order. She may look like the housemaid, but she’s not. Secondly, she doesn’t “pull herself up by her bootstraps.” Her fairy godmother gives her all sorts of accoutrements to make her more desirable or, in the language of our specific translation, more “charming.” To follow up on the papers they had initially written, we spent the next class interrogating the text, asking questions of the following sort: If the Prince is so in love with Cinderella that he just can’t go on without her, why can’t he remember what she looks like? Shouldn’t he remember her face? Her voice? Why does it all boil down to whether a shoe fits or not?

My point here is that a crucial step in becoming a responsible citizen, a thinking person, and a worthy scholar is learning to question the world around you. To turn over the stones, especially the very familiar ones, and look underneath of them in an effort to understand the things squirming around in the loam. What my students wanted to stick to was an American Cinderella, a girl whose tale reflects the American Dream – not the girl they were actually reading about on the page. Any teacher of writing knows that a lot of what writing teachers actually teach is reading, and reading critically. In this case, I tried to get my students to turn the words over and think about the choices writers and translators make in order to persuade their audiences to accept or agree with a certain idea or perspective on the world. Such a thoughtful interaction with writing, especially in the freshman year, translates into greater depth of thought as our students move forward in academia and then enter the real world, whatever their profession.


Dr. Jessica McCort is an Instructor of Writing in the English Department at Duquesne University. Dr. McCort’s scholarship focuses on two areas: (1) the appropriation of children’s literature, particularly Grimm’s and Andersen’s fairy tales and Lewis Carroll’s Alice books, by women writers and (2) gothic horror in literature for children and young adults, particularly in modern fairy-tale revisions. Her most recent book project is a compilation of essays concerning the intersection of the horror genre and children’s books.

Leave a comment

Reflections on Teaching in Duquesne’s New FlexTech Classroom

By Dr. James P. Purdy, Associate Professor of English and University Writing Center Director, Duquesne University

As someone with a scholarly interest in the design of pedagogical spaces for writing instruction (e.g., see for a link to Making Space: Writing Instruction, Infrastructure, and Multiliteracies, my in-press co-edited digital book with the University of Michigan Press on this topic), I was very excited to be scheduled to teach Writing for Digital Media in one of Duquesne’s new FlexTech classrooms in Spring 2015. This semester I also used another FlexTech classroom for a University Writing Center event.

FlexTech 551

The FlexTech classroom in College Hall 551. Image courtesy of Dr. James Purdy.

Duquesne’s FlexTech classrooms have seating organized in pods with chairs around glass-top tables and wall-mounted computers, wall glassboards, instructor stations with larger touchscreen monitors (and cool, fresh color schemes!). The room where I taught my course, 551 College Hall, has four pods and accommodates 20 students. The other room I used, 442 Fisher Hall, is larger, seating 40 students around five pods and one conference table. More information on the classrooms is available on Duquesne’s Media Services website:

I have learned much from teaching in the FlexTech classrooms and share here some of my reflections. While I’m drawing from my particular experiences, these reflections are intended to be relevant to teachers using other similar spaces. Your mileage may vary, of course—local context is crucial—but I hope these thoughts and ideas will be applicable and helpful.

FlexTech 551 pod setup

The pod setup in 551 College Hall, showing the writable tables and wall-mounted computers. Image courtesy of Dr. James Purdy.


The most exciting aspect of the space was the collaboration it afforded.

The up-to-date computer technology was super, but more exciting was that the seating arrangement encouraged more collaboration. Through its physical design the FlexTech classroom space helped to enact this approach by compelling students to look at, talk to, and write for one another (rather than only me).

Students appreciated opportunities to use their own computer technology.

Because digital writing and research spaces are now so personalized, students welcomed chances to work with their own tools in class.

With more and multiple spaces for writing, participation spread more fully across students.

As a teacher of writing-intensive courses, I frequently ask students to write in class. In the FlexTech spaces, students wrote more in class.

My class planning changed—and didn’t.

As the semester progressed, I intentionally designed activities to exploit the room’s technological, spatial, and material affordances (e.g., asking students to post group writing on the pod wall-mounted computers, to share question responses on the wall glassboards; to use the glass tabletops to write to generate ideas for discussion; to give presentations on digital writing and research tools using the large, front wall-mounted computer). However, I was careful not to ask students to use the room’s technologies or features for their own sake. Writing for Digital Media lent itself very well topically to use and critical exploration of the room, so most days included engagement with the computers and tables. But not all did. And I quickly learned that was okay.

Digital technology wasn’t always better.

Initially I was excited about the whiteboard app on the instructor machine that allowed for writing on the large wall-mounted monitor with a stylus or my finger. The digital technology was super for projecting texts, showing videos, and sharing directions, especially as each pod computer could show the content of my instructor computer, which made for easier reading for students. Writing “on the board,” however, didn’t require it, so I went back to the whiteboard. I found that writing with a marker on the glassboards ultimately worked better.

These spaces made writing fun.

Something about writing on tables with colored markers made writing enjoyable for everyone. Perhaps it was the novelty of the space and its setup. But capitalizing on such newness helped bring life and excitement to writing activities.



James P. Purdy teaches in the English Department and directs the University Writing Center at Duquesne. With Randall McClure, he edited two collections: The New Digital Scholar: Exploring and Enriching the Research and Writing Practices of NextGen Students, which was awarded the Silver Medal for Education in the Commentary/Theory Category for the 2014 Independent Publisher Book Awards, and The Next Digital Scholar: A Fresh Approach to the Common Core State Standards in Research and Writing, which was a finalist in the Educational/Academic Category at the 2014 USA Best Books Awards. With co-author Joyce R. Walker, he won the 2011 Ellen Nold Award for the Best Article in Computers and Composition Studies and the 2008 Kairos Best Webtext Award.

Leave a comment

The Serving Leader: A Book Review

By Rachel Luckenbill, Instructional Consultant for TAs at the Center for Teaching Excellence and English PhD Candidate at Duquesne University

I recently read a book called The Serving Leader (2003) by Ken Jennings and John Stahl-Wert. Though as the cover of the book states the authors focus on “actions that will transform your team, your business and your community,” I was struck by how applicable their ideas are to academia. The authors profess a model of leadership that values excellence and competitiveness without sacrificing attention to the needs and value of people. In this post I offer a review of their book and make some suggestions about how college instructors can be serving leaders.

Courtesy of

Courtesy of

Jennings and Stahl-Wert present the concept of “serving leaders” through the fictionalized story of a young businessman named Mike who is pursuing reconciliation with his father and attempting to engage with his father’s consulting business as the older man’s health fails. His assignment is to learn about serving leadership and begin to implement it himself. After meeting a series of community leaders from sectors as diverse as education, manufacturing, and military, Mike begins to put together a complete picture of what a serving leader does, all the while realizing that the very principles which make an organization healthy can also breathe new life into a personal relationship. The leadership model outlined in the book has a distinct spiritual component; it relies on principles of altruism and community taught in both the Old and New Testament, but the authors demonstrate the model’s applicability in both secular and faith-based organizations.

The writing is clear and straightforward and the story itself is engaging, but the real value of this book lies in the principles that appear to go against the grain of typical cutthroat corporate practices. Here’s a snapshot of them.

Five Actions of a Serving Leader (pages 100-101):

  • Run to great purpose – lead a team by offering a compelling goal and “reason why”
  • Upend the pyramid – place yourself “at the bottom of the pyramid and unleash the energy, excitement, and talents of the team”
  • Raise the bar – set high expectations and be selective in your choice of team leaders
  • Blaze the trail – teach serving leader principles to others while “removing obstacles to performance”
  • Build on strength – assign each person a role that allows him or her to “contribute what he or she is best at”

As I read the book, I couldn’t help but imagine how this model would play out on a University campus. What would it mean if each one of us tried using our position of authority or power to remove obstacles that stand in the way of our colleagues instead of using that same authority to focus on building our own reputations and CVs? Jennings’ and Stahl-Wert’s model is decidedly communal. They recommend that each leader build an “encouragement group” that provides affirmation and “perseverance” in difficult times (55) and they insist that “if you want to do something that really changes someone’s life, the best thing you can do is make the person you’re trying to help a participant in the process” (57).

Imagine with me for a moment what it would look like to perform as a serving teacher in the classroom:

  • Run to great purpose – both on the syllabus and in class, connect the content and skills your students are learning to a greater purpose such as the learning objectives for the course and the careers and life situations your students anticipate facing outside of school
  • Upend the pyramid – try a student-centered approach, de-centering yourself by employing active learning strategies that involve students in their own learning process rather than positioning them as passive listeners while you lecture
  • Raise the bar – research suggests that the expectations you have for your students will affect their ability to perform: the more optimistic your expectations, the more likely the students are to succeed
  • Blaze the trail – remove obstacles your students might face by scheduling practice sessions at a time and place when you are available, by surveying students at the end of each class to find out which concept was perplexing or unclear and revisiting it at the beginning of the next class, or by encouraging students to reflect on their own work habits and helping them construct environments and practices that promote concentration and productivity
  • Build on strength – while it’s certainly important to help students improve skills they have not yet mastered, try pairing these lessons with either written or verbal comments about each student’s strengths: show students the potential their strengths offer and the next steps they can take based on their already positive progress

I myself have seen this model work outside the classroom as well. I’m currently writing my dissertation and am thankful that the way my committee functions resembles the serving leader model. All three of my committee members have helped me see the greater purpose of my work in building cultural sensitivity; they upend the pyramid by encouraging my own initiatives rather than letting their agendas drive my project; they raise the bar by having high expectations and refusing to allow me to settle for less than what I’m capable of even when I’m tired and discouraged; they blaze the trail by removing obstacles in my path, helping me make valuable connections with colleagues in my field and unraveling perplexing ideas in the theory I study; and whenever I get stuck in a cycle of comparing myself to others, the committee members build on strength by helping me focus instead on the methods and content that make my project unique. I can say from experience that this model makes me a more productive and satisfied graduate student than I would be otherwise.

So as you close out the semester and prepare your courses and committees for the summer and fall, think of ways that you can be a serving leader in your classroom, department, and university communities. Jennings and Stahl-Wert suggest that as you practice serving leadership, you pave the way for productivity and fulfillment for others while moving toward a greater sense of wholeness and accomplishment for yourself.  In the comments below, I invite you to share ways you practice any part of the serving leaders model either in your classroom or organization.

Leave a comment

Keeping Work/Life Balance Alive

By Rachel Luckenbill, Instructional Consultant for TAs at the Center for Teaching Excellence and English PhD Candidate, Duquesne University

Like most of you, I’m in the midst of attempting an impressive balancing act. I’m two years into writing my dissertation, working hard to finish within the next year while presenting at conferences and attempting to prepare an article manuscript for review by a scholarly journal. I have a graduate assistantship at the Center for Teaching Excellence. I’m beginning to prepare job materials since I’ll be on the academic market this coming fall. I’m a newlywed, approaching the four month anniversary and appreciating every day with my husband but realizing that balancing two schedules instead of just one is quite a feat. And then there are the “extracurriculars” that help keep life full and interesting: I play piano for my church, spend time with my adorable two-year-old goddaughter, volunteer, read books, exercise, cook, paint, and more.

Time. There is never enough of it to do all the things that I want and need to do.

balance by Stuart Miles

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles

Two weeks ago, I facilitated a faculty/graduate student workshop at Duquesne University called “Keeping Work/Life Balance Alive.” I found the perspective and advice offered by our four panelists to be realistic, encouraging, and useful. So in today’s post I want to share with you highlights from the workshop in the hope that you will feel better equipped to approach your busy over-full days peacefully and mindfully.

I structured the workshop in response to a December 9, 2014 CNN article titled “Work – Life Balance Is Dead” by Ron Friedman. Friedman questions the value of trying to keep work and personal life separate from one another in an age when we have the option of being always connected to technology. He writes, “We can bemoan the blending of our professional and personal lives, or alternatively, we can look for innovative solutions . . . Workplace flexibility has been linked with a host of positive well-being outcomes, including higher job satisfaction, lower stress, and reduced work-family conflict.” Not everyone has workplace flexibility, but academics often do. I asked participants in the workshop to begin by writing in response to the prompt, “In my life, achieving work/life balance means . . .” so that each person would have a chance to articulate for themselves whether balance means separation, integration or some combination of the two. Following the writing exercise, the four panelists spoke. Here are some of the highlights:

  • Dr. Heather Rusiewicz from Speech-Language Pathology embraces the blending of work and personal life. Her energetic young children often provide apt examples of speech development and she’s thankful for students who enjoy babysitting. She has also sought out quiet places where she can focus intently on work, increasing productivity and freeing her mind for time with family. Heather reminded everyone that loving what you have and being grateful is key to finding a sense of balance and peace in the midst of a busy life.
  • Dr. Ira Buckner from Pharmaceutics tries his hardest not to multitask and prefers to keep some sense of separation between work life and personal life. He recommended that faculty and TAs identify their limits for each task they have. What tasks require excellence, and for which ones is “good enough” sufficient? He recognizes that requiring excellence of yourself for every single task often leads to burnout and a lack of balance between work and personal life.
  • Dr. Sarah Wright from English underscored the importance of “dedicated” work time and “dedicated” personal time. She also called our attention to the importance of daydreaming. Some of the workshop participants talked about feeling guilty if they weren’t always working, but Sarah presented research which suggests that daydreaming and sleeping make our minds more productive. It’s not just okay to rest; it’s good to rest.
  • Dr. Benjamin Burkholder represented both a graduate student and parent perspective. He pointed out that the flexibility of an academic schedule can actually facilitate time with family. When writing his dissertation, Ben would wake up two hours earlier than his daughter so that he could put in solid focused work time and then be completely free to be with family without feeling like the two were competing. He also offered the welcome reminder that taking a day off every now and then doesn’t just help a person relax, it can help a scholar be more mentally productive.

I walked away from the workshop with a sense of relief. Whether balance means building a protective barrier between work and personal life or whether it means deliberately integrating the two, it is possible to find a balance that is meaningful for your own experience. But it takes letting go of the myths which so often persist in academia that those who are most productive are always working or that perfectionism always leads to higher-quality work. So join me today in taking some time to daydream, to sip a cup of tea while listening to the birds, and to get that extra hour of sleep instead of staying up to try and write one more page or finish grading one more exam. The work you do tomorrow may very well depend upon the rest you take today.

Leave a comment

Teachers as Learners

By Elizabeth Pask, M.S. Ed. and current doctoral student in Duquesne University’s School of Education

“Your life as a teacher begins the day you realize you are always a learner.”

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at

-Robert John Meehan

How can I teach when I’m still a student myself?  How can I train others in a field I am still learning about? These are questions I pondered as I embarked on my first university teaching experiences at Duquesne.  As a current doctoral student in the field of school psychology, I wondered whether or not I had any expertise, any skill, or even any right to take on the responsibility of training and teaching other students in my field.

I am fresh out of classes and currently on my clinically based internship experience, and also very new to both being a practitioner and teaching at the university level.   As I reflected back on my own graduate school experiences, memories of theories, laws, textbook readings, and case studies were some of the strategies from my foundational courses that were useful in helping me learn how the field ideally works.  The most helpful learning experiences, however, were just that: experiences.   A recent writer for The Flourishing Academic, Dr. Susan Hines, wrote that the best teaching and learning for new and experienced teachers alike happens when you create an experience.  This is what I have been living since school got out, and this is what I have capitalized on in order to inform teaching in my courses.

The last year of my training program is all clinical, real-life experience.  I am actually working as a practitioner in my field, which had initially seemed like an eternity away when I was first starting out.  I am finding that those theories which seem old and dusty in their books are real, and are also not as neatly applied in the trenches as they initially seemed.  I have been learning through my clinical experiences that applying what you learn in the classroom is sometimes messy when the nuances of reality come into play.  For example, students do not fit neatly into special education eligibility categories like they sometimes did in the case studies that were presented in class.  In another instance, nobody ever really discussed what to do after you realize too late that a previously undiscovered complex trauma history was interfering with a child’s abilities to perform well or what implications that has on the way you’re assessing or treating that student.

This reflection and new clinical experience was what helped me to shape my teaching approach.  I wanted to dust off those theories, get them out of their books, and practice them with my students.  I realized that I have the perfect opportunity to do so in this training year.  I am able to use actual instances, complex cases, and my own mistakes to create applied, field based experiences to use as a major teaching tool.  I realized that I could use my own learning and growing process and translate it to a practical experience.  I also quickly realized that my students and I were learning together.

As a result of being able to use my clinical experience, my philosophy of teaching has been shaped into an action-oriented one, in which I ensure an understanding of theoretical groundwork for the course, provide structured and supervised practice, and assess using real life applications.  I believe that sufficient knowledge of theory is imperative for foundational understandings of the world of education at any level; however, I have often found that theory is lost without application and action, which includes both knowledge and skills that later foster and cultivate practice in the ‘real world.’

Instead of feeling less able because I’m still “just a student,” I embraced the opportunities I had and translated them into learning tools for all of us.  I was fortunate to make this realization at the outset of my teaching career.  My unique position as a practitioner who teaches will always afford me the opportunity to keep being a student so that I can continue using my practical experience to teach other future leaders in the field.

Now it’s your turn: in the comments below I invite you to share a “real-life” experience that both complicated and deepened the knowledge you teach in the classroom.

Leave a comment

Helping Students Learn from Returned Tests

This teaching and learning tip has been compiled by Dr. Steven Hansen, Associate Dir. of Faculty Development at Duquesne University’s Center for Teaching Excellence

With approximately one month left in the semester it’s not too late to adopt a new practice that could increase your students’ learning gains. In this post, Dr. Hansen uncovers some simple ways to help students see beyond their test scores and examine their own learning process. Visit CTE’s webpage for more teaching and learning tips.


Image courtesy of artur84 at

Exam wrappers, post-test surveys, and error analysis exercises are useful tools to help your students to learn from returned exams and to perform better on future tests.

“All too often when students receive back a graded exam, they focus on a single feature – the score they earned. Although this focus on ‘the grade’ is understandable, it can lead students to miss out on several learning opportunities that such an assessment can provide.” (Ambrose, et al, 2010)

The next time you return a test or exam, consider assigning your students an exercise to help them learn from the test.

What can students learn from an Exam Wrapper, Post-Test Survey or Error Analysis Exercise?

In the Error Analysis Exercise outlined by Du Bois and Staley (1997), students analyze their wrong answers to find three dimensions:

  1. Students “identify the informational source(s) of the questions” that they missed. Did the information come from the text, lecture, other source, or a combination of sources?
  2. Students then “identify the strategies they should have employed to make information more meaningful and memorable.” Did the students have the information marked in their text? Were their notes about the topic sufficient for review?
  3. “Once students identify error patterns on our test, they generate a study plan to repair the deficiencies encountered in the analysis.”

What are some examples of Exam Wrappers or Post-Test Surveys?

Sample Exam Wrapper for a physics course might include the following:

1. Approximately how much time did you spend preparing for this exam? ______2  What percentage of your test-preparation was spent in each of these activities?a. Reading textbook section(s) for the first time ______b. Rereading textbook section(s) ______c. Reviewing homework ______

d. Solving problems for practice ______

e. Reviewing your own notes ______

f. Reviewing materials from course website ______

g. Other _______

(Please specify) _______________________________

3. Now that you have looked over your graded exam, estimate the percentage of points you lost due to each of the following.

a. Trouble with vectors and vector notation ___________

b. Algebra or arithmetic errors __________

c. Lack of understanding of the concept __________

d. Not knowing how to approach the problem ________

e. Careless mistakes _______

f. Other ________

(Please specify) ___________

4. Based on your responses to the questions above, name at least three things you plan to do differently in preparing for the next exam. For instance, will you spend more time studying, change a specific study habit or try a new one (if so, name it), make math more automatic so it does not get in the way of physics, try to sharpen some other skill (if so, name it), solve more practice problems, or something else?

5. What can we do to help support your learning and your preparation for the next exam?

(From Ambrose, et al, 2010)

A General Post-Test Survey might include the following items:

Part I — How did you Study for the Exam

1. Which part of the exam was easiest for you? Why?2. Which part of the exam was most difficult? Why?3. Activities completed prior to exam (answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’):a. All required reading assignmentsb. Review of lecture notes

c. Make study sheets from reading and lecture notes

d. Self-testing/reciting of material

e. Prediction of possible questions

f. Study with friends

g. Other:____________________________

4. Which of the above did you find most helpful in preparing for this exam?

5. How many hours did you spend preparing for the exam? On how many different days did you study?

6. Did you feel prepared when you walked into the exam? Why or why not?

7. How might you study for the next exam in this course differently than you studied for this exam?


Part II — Identify the Problems You Had with the Exam

1. Write the number of each item you missed in the top row of the chart.
2. Check each sentence that fits the missed question.
3. Total the checks in each row.
4. Look at the sentences with the highest totals and decide what you can do to get a better test score next time.
Question Incorrect          # Totals
Insufficient Information
The information was not in my notes.
I studied the information but could not remember it.
I knew the main ideas but not details.
I knew the information but could not apply it.
I studied the wrong information.
I did not read the text thoroughly.
Test Anxiety
I spent too much time daydreaming.
I was so tired I could not concentrate.
I was so hungry I could not concentrate.
I panicked.
I experienced mental block.
Lack of Test-Wisdom
I did not eliminate grammatically incorrect choices.
I did not make the best choice.
I did not notice limiting words.
I did not notice a double negative.
I carelessly marked a wrong choice.
Test Skills
I misread the directions.
I made poor use of the time provided.
I wrote poorly organized responses.
I wrote incomplete responses.
I changed a correct answer to a wrong one.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C. & Noman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Du Bois, N. F., & Staley, R. K. (1997): “A Self-Regulated Learning Approach to Teaching Educational Psychology. Educational Psychology Review 9 (2): 171-197.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 775 other followers