Blogroll Class of Spring 2011

Check out my blogroll to see the Blogs created by my classmates in EC&I 834 Spring session.

Module 9

The new buzzword, both in curriculum theory as well as instruction principles and effective practices is “authenticity”. Given the changes which the new millennium is suggesting are critical for our students to learn, what are your thoughts on the relevance and applicability of WebQuests as a medium to foster and promote authentic learning?

Authentic learning is a loaded word within a loaded context. We are almost assuming that students will naturally acquire an ability to become authentic in their learning because we throw technology their way. The truth of the matter is that authenticity has been abound in education for years. It is how the materials are prepared and the expectations in which they are presented that in fact make them authentic. Do we as teachers dare tout ourselves as creating authentic tasks when in fact the authenticity lies in the process that must be driven by the student? Therefore, WebQuests are certainly one way in which students may experience authentic learning but it is not because it is in the form of a WebQuest, it lies in the journey that is guided by a skilled educator and an engaged learner.

Module 8

Would you agree or disagree that Jing screen captures might be the “ultimate realization” of the Web 2.0 medium? Why?

Hmmmm . . . Ultimate? I don’t know about ultimate but I think Jing may be close. I absolutely loved using this tool. The possibilities for interaction and collaboration appear endless. I am particularly intrigued with the use of Jing as our school division moves to a new reporting system called Power School. I can see schools using Jing to show parents how to access information using Power School. Having this access will be a very new concept – especially for the elementary population.
Students would love Jing for two reasons: it is easy and quick to use. Add a back channel and we just have the ultimate on our hands!!!

Module 6

One of the major drawbacks in regards to Qwikis was the difficulty in editing or adding to the information that was already there (or not!). So, using what you know now about Qwikis and Prezis, could you see ways in which you (or your students) could create your own Qwiki using Prezi? What would you suggest as a process?

Well, as I mentioned in my Qwiki post, I am not a huge fan. Therefore, I find it unlikely that I would share the Qwiki tool with my students for more than just a glance. I think that students would benefit from knowing Qwiki exists and that it could possibly be useful when combined with other resources of value and reliable content.
Now Prezi’s are a different thing!! The day after finishing my Prezi assignment I introduced the concept to a group of students that was I working with in my Learning Resource Teacher capacity. The students were finishing a reading comprehension task that their teacher had assigned and were interested in the stories they read but were dreading the process of question and answer to show their understanding. After checking with the teacher, I led the students through a series of mini lessons based on my limited knowledge of Prezi. They were hooked! Within 2 hours all of the students had created Prezi’s (of varying complexity) that depicted their understanding and showed true comprehension of what they had learned in class. The students were challenged and excited about their product and the teacher was pleased with the result. The difficulty was that our time was limited and of course the wanted to explore Prezi more. I guess if that is the only difficulty than life is pretty great!!

Module 4

“Qwiki: Thumbs up or thumbs down?”  Why? Let’s discuss the pros and cons of this online tool so we can make better informed choices when we decide to use it.

I am actually going to be the bad ass in all of this and give the Qwiki a thumbs down. As I mentioned in an earlier post, we are in the world of wanting information and feedback at lightening fast pace. This does not mean that this is necessarily a good thing for everything. Sure when I posted on Facebook that my husband and I were expecting a baby boy it was wonderful to see 46 comments and 25 or so “likes” within a matter of a few hours. But does speed necessarily mean quality content?
I say no and this is exactly why I did not give Qwiki a thumbs up. I found information that was outdated and many mispronunciations. I also found it interesting that major facts were overshadowed by minor points of interest in some circumstances. I get it though; the whole idea is for people to work together to repair and make a better product. That being said, is more content equivalent to better quality? For me some of the Qwiki’s had more content but that did not necessarily create a better product. I think Qwiki has potential. I relate Qwiki to the student who writes a novel at age 10 where all the lines are double spaced, letters are in capitals and the plot is rather weak. There is a novel but how often would you want to read it? There is potential with some serious editing and revising and the impact of an amazing Language Arts teacher!