As an advocate for improving teaching in the 21st century, create a 12-15 slide digital presentation for an audience of district personnel. Your goal is to get them to support your ideas and to better understand your schools current climate.

You must include a title, reference slide, presenter notes, and 3-5 peer-reviewed scholarly sources.

In your presentation, address the following:

A vision of technology infusion with
*two supporting strategies to promote the participation of others in shared decision-making and community building.
*Two strategies to develop the leadership and technology skills of others.
*Two school-wide strategies to more effectively use existing or emerging digital tools and resources to support student learning.
*Two possible obstacles that will impede improvement on teaching practices and technology infusion and ways to overcome these possible obstacles. 
*Four practical and effective ways of encouraging change in teacher practices. 

Cloning anyone??

There are ethical concerns for certain, but also the role of the environment cannot be underestimated. We have a genotype and phenotype. Phenotype is influenced by environmental factors. For instance, when researchers cloned a cat with the clone being an exact genetic makeup of the other cat, the cloned cat showed a different coat coloring pattern. This is phenotype. Even environment in the womb can influence phenotype.

Not quite the same, but similar, people have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to clone their beloved pet after it has died. To the surprise of owners, the pet was not the same as their first beloved pet.

Check this out:
http://www.today.com/id/28892792/ns/today-today_pets_and_animals/t/couplespendclone deaddog/#.UXWiHbjn8iQ

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/03/paying-usd100-000-to-clone-your-dog-wont-give-you-your-dog-back.html (Links to an external site.)

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/09/30/428927516/cloning-your-dog-for-a-mere-100-000 (Links to an external site.)

http://en.sooam.com/index.html (Links to an external site.)

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-dogs-go-heaven/201602/cloning-pets

The subject of Week 6’s post will be a continuation of this topic after you view the videos. While we cannot perform these types of experiments on humans, can we learn anything from the animal data? What do you think? What do you conclude from viewing these stories? What are the psychological and ethical ramifications? Can we draw any conclusions that could apply to humans who want to clone a child or genetically modify a child?

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/11/26/670752865/chinese-scientist-says-hes-first-to-genetically-edit-babies

In your Literature Review, you are asking and answering a question. You are not comparing and contracting articles. You are not evaluating the limitations in the literature. You are answering a question. The way you approach your question (i.e., your subtopics) are determined by the research, not by what you think should be covered. To figure out what the research is covering, you need to read a lot of articles (or the abstracts initially).  In your intro you present your question (why its important) and you might include background info (e.g., symptoms of autism, divorce rates in America, laws relating to your question). Other than that background info, all of your subtopics should be about answering your question. Take a good look at your subtopics. If you dont see how a subtopic addresses your question, drop it (even if its very interesting).  At the end of your paper (i.e., the conclusion), review all of your subtopics and then present the final answer to your question. 13-15 references.