Twitter Adventure

Previously I tried Twitter as a social tool. After years of using Facebook and being comfortable with the interface of Facebook and there wasn't any part of Twitter I liked. I constantly looked for the "like" button but it does not exist on Twitter. After enrolling in ETEC 527 I find out I must not only join Twitter but I must have "Twitter Adventures." What could I do but go on a Twitter Adventure.

For the first few days I will admit I was not enjoying the adventure. Once I learned how Twitter works and became used to the interface Twitter isn't as bad as I thought. I am actually beginning to like it. Typing a topic I would like to explore couldn't be any easier. There are many great teaching resources that have been shared by my peers and that is something I didn't experience at that level on Facebook. The greatest challenge I have to overcome is keeping my tweets under 140 characters.

Posting random thoughts about myself and my life isn't something I am interested in doing on Twitter. I am interested in the information and resources that are available concerning education and technology at the click of the mouse. Twitter provides a platform where educators can share resources and ideas from all over the world. Another positive aspect from using Twitter is getting real time updates on events that happening around the world whether it be political, technology conventions, etc.

Reading & Video Reflections

Readings
A Conceptual Framework for Using and Evaluating Web-Based Learning Resources in School Education Here is another link for the article above:
 http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol9/JITEv9p053-079Hadjerrouit743.pdf Video
Web 2.0 Tool Evaluation Criteria

My Reading Reflection

Article Review

A Conceptual Framework for Using and Evaluating Web-Based Learning Resources in School Education 
By: Said Hadjerrouit

             This article discusses framework for and evaluating web-based learning resources in education. I found the article helpful and informative. The article informs the readers that existing WBLRs still lack a number of important issues that need to be considered in design and evaluation(p.54).  The first issue the article states is "Technical usability is important to minimize the cognitive load and helps to free more resources for the learning process itself (p.54). Minimizing the cognitive load will give the students the ability to focus on their learning instead of focusing on how to use the technology or navigate through complicated web-based resources. The second concern the article discusses is the WBLRs need to have more pedagogical usability. Features that should be taken into account is creating WBLRs that are more "flexible, interactive, motivating, and collaborative (p.55). There are many tools out there but the ones which are flexible, interactive, motivating, and collaborative are the ones that stands out in education. The third pedagogical value stated in the article is the lack of support to achieve a "high level of flexibility, interactivity, feedback, differentiation, and collaboration (p.55). These are necessary for the learner-centered approach of the constructivist theory. Using technology effectively puts the student in charge of their learning and the learner-centered approach is necessary. Fourth, teachers should use the WBLRs in connection with their theories. The technology should be integrated into their content and classrooms and should not be used "just to use technology." It should be meaningful and support students learning.

            The information that was most helpful to me is the key criteria that influence the pedagogical usability of web-based learning resources that Hadjerrouit covers in the article. The key criteria that influence the pedagogical usability of web-based learning resources that a teacher should take into account is:

-Understandability
-Added value
-Goal-orientation
-Time
-Interactivity
-Multimedia
-Motivation
-Differentiation
-Flexibility
-Autonomy
-Collaboration
-Variation

Educators must take all the factors of usability into account for the web-based learning resources to be most effective and worth using.

            The students in the study pointed out they wanted a higher level of interaction with the WBLRs. If students opinions are taken into account there is a higher possibility they will gain more from their learning. Being forced  to use technology the student doesn't gain anything from feels like a waste of time for them.

            Following this model educators won't be using technology in the classroom just to use it. By following the framework when choosing the technology, all the bases will be covered. The main features are technology, pedagogy, and content, taking all the key criteria of pedagogical usability into account, and the context of use/evaluation. I feel this is a very practical model to follow.

 Hadjerrouit, S. (2010). A conceptual framework for using and evaluating web-based learning resources in school education. Retrieved from http://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/138149

Video Reflection

            I found the information on the video "Web 2.0 Tool Evaluation Criteria" very insightful. All the criteria discussed should be taken into consideration while evaluating Web 2.0 tools for educational use. There are many fun and engaging activities out there that can motivate students, but do not challenge their critical thinking or provide a finished product.  The technology should not be the focus of the learning is one criteria that stood out to me. I am still trying to learn how to use a new Web 2.0 tool and I spend more time learning about the tool than using it to actually learn. All my previous ETEC classes have helped me clearly understand how important it is for students to produce a finished product. This has allowed me to look back and see how much I have learned. I feel all the criteria must be met for meaningful learning must take place.

Web 2.0 Tool Evaluation Criteria

Technology Evaluation and Rubric

There are many different models and theories on how to evaluate technology for use in education. Please find two articles about evaluating technology that are related to your field or subject matter/grade level. Post the links to the articles and a brief summary of each article. In your summary, please include your impressions of the article including how practical you feel the models or theories presented are for a practitioner in your field. 

Technology Evaluation Article #1

A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Multimedia Learning Resources

            The article A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Multimedia Learning Resources by Leacock and Nesbit presents the Learning Object Review Instrument (LORI).  The goal of LORI is to "balance assessment validity with efficiency of the evaluation process" (p.44). LORI is used specifically for multimedia learning and is a heuristic quality rating tool for digital learning resources and was developed by the E-Learning Research and Assessment Network. The authors believe evaluation instruments are needed for smaller digital resources because of the lack of research in psychology and education in ready-made learning objects on the Web.

            LORI's dimensions are made up of nine items which consist of; learning goal alignment, feedback and adaptation, motivation, presentation design. interaction usability, accessibility, reusability, and standards compliance.  

 Table 1. Items in LORI 1.5 (Nesbit, Belfer, & Leacock, 2004).

Item Brief Description

Content quality Veracity, accuracy, balanced presentation of ideas, and appropriate level of detail
Learning goal alignment Alignment among learning goals, activities, assessments, and learner characteristics

Feedback and adaptation Adaptive content or feedback driven by differential learner input or learner modeling

Motivation Ability to motivate and interest an identified population of learners

Presentation design Design of visual and auditory information for enhanced learning and efficient mental processing

Interaction usability Ease of navigation, predictability of the user interface, and the quality of the interface help features

Accessibility Design of controls and presentation formats to accommodate disabled and mobile

learners

Reusability Ability to use in varying learning contexts and with learners from different backgrounds

Standards compliance Adherence to international standards and specifications

            LORI was created to help reviewers to quickly assess the strengths and weaknesses of  the resources learning objectives. LORI consists of a 5- point rubric for each of the nine items to help educators quickly evaluate and decided if the resource will meet their educational needs. I believe this is a sound framework for evaluating  multimedia learning resources, although I feel security should be added in the items.

 Leacock, T. L., & Nesbit, J. C. (2007). A Framework for Evaluating the Quality of Multimedia Learning Resources.Educational Technology & Society, 10 (2), 44-59.

http://www.sfu.ca/~jcnesbit/articles/LeacockNesbit2007.pdf 

Technology Evaluation Article #2

Understanding Technology Literacy: A Framework for Evaluating Educational Technology Integration

By Randall S. Davies

Brigham Young University

This article by Randall Davies is written to outline a framework to understand and assess the technology literacy of teachers and students. It discusses the federal legislation in the United States that mandates that technology be integrated into the curriculum because learning in enhanced through the use of technology. Technology must be evaluated for the use in the classroom. The article states the importance of critically analyzing the technology to be used in the classroom. The technology literacy of the students needs to be taken into account because if the student has difficulty with the technology, the focus will not be on the student learning the content. The article makes a point in stating, “It is a common fallacy to suppose that because students are growing up in a technological age they are somehow instinctively capable of using technology to learn what is expected of them in school (Davies).” It does not matter how great the technology tool is if the students can’t understand how to use it. The importance of this article is; evaluate the student’s technology literacy prior to choosing the technology the students will use independently. If the students don’t understand the technology tool the teacher wants to implement, the teacher should determine if the tool is worth taking the time to teach the students the technology tool.

The article stressed the use of TPAK and the lack of TPAK when educators use technology to save time. I found this article helpful because when evaluating technologies for the classroom it is important that the students are not spending more time learning the technology than they are learning the concepts the technology is being used for.

EBSCOhost Link

https://proxy.tamu-commerce.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tfh&AN=64128323&site=ehost-live 

Davies, R. (2011). Understanding Technology Literacy: A Framework for Evaluating Educational Technology Integration.Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice To Improve Learning, 55(5), 45-52. doi:10.1007/s11528-011-0527-3

Vanity Search

I must say after my "vanity search" I did not like what I see. Although I am thankful that my digital presence is related to education. One of the returns for web pages is radaris.com. This site I feel is very intrusive to my personal information. It has names I have used in the past (past marriage), my maiden name and current name. For a fee someone can get more information on me (very scary)!  The most surprising result was from mocavo.com. After clicking on the result I found listed for all the world to see was information on my divorce that even included names, date of marriage and divorce, number of children, along with the marriage certificate number. The site stated the information was acquired from Texas Department of State Health Services. The positive side of mocavo is it might be very useful for my genealogy research.

Upon completing the Google picture search the results show every picture I have ever used on my blog come up in a picture search under my name. Pictures from my Google+ account are listed and also pictures from my Facebook (no surprise there). This has me thinking about changing privacy settings.

After conducting a vanity search I will stress the point to my students the importance of being aware of their own digital footprints. There are sites that take our information and post it to the world if we like it or not, but we do have control of most of our information that is displayed to the world. I was just surprised with all the information I wasn't aware that was available to anyone. The vanity search was an eye opener and although we do have control over most of the information, there are records and personal information that we have no control over that is shared with the world.