Carney, K. (2011, August). Think oustide the book.Learning and Leading, 39(1), Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/learn/publications/learning-and-leading/digital-edition-august-2011.aspx
This article is about how text books have not done any favors for the schools. With the ever demanding standards that need to be met, many teachers fall back on their textbooks to drive their lesson plans. This not creative and leads to inability to meet standards that are not addressed in the textbooks. Vail school district in Arizona decided to change this. They started with the standards and used them as guidelines for the curriculum. Empire High School, in Vail's district, opened the first textbook free all laptop school in 2005. Because the schools were not guided by textbooks, the teachers had to rely on internest based information and even more so on collaboration. From this, Beyond Textbooks was born. It was a collaborative effort and included an online wiki site that teachers could use to gather information they need for lessons and to help stockpile and grow information toward continued success in the future. The work Vail district has done has encouraged other districts to follow in their footsteps and to share the information that had been painstakingly gathered by Vail in promotion of their program. One other key point is that the Beyond Textbooks program was thought of by administrational minds but they had allowed teachers to seize control and help define the program. Vail's program has led to increases in performance tracked in 8 out of 10 subject areas and has allowed Vail to seriously reduce their budget per student.
Can this program prove that we are ready to move beyond textbooks in schools?
The program, although called Beyond Textbooks, is really about not allowing textbooks to drive the curriculum rather than removing them altogether. I have wondered many times myself if textbooks are out of date. They cost money to print, they use trees for paper, ink, they cost significant money, they must be shipped and use fuel, they are often limited in scope, and they go out of date quickly. It seems to me that we should embrace technology rather than continuing to use printed books.
Can removal of textbooks from schools help the budget woes?
Well, we know from the above article that Vail had saved money. In fact, they went from a materials budget of $53 per student to $9 per student in cost. That is an amazing savings. If that could be replicated, why aren't the other school districts following suit already? I think that we should embrace technology and use it to better our schools in ways that traditional methods can not.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Journal #9 / MI
AAC stands for alternative augmentative communication. This refers to the use of technology, whether high or low tech to help individuals who cannot communicate due to impairments of speech. There is a wide variety of tools and software available on the market to assist with AAC.
One high tech tool that I researched was the Springboard Lite. The Springboard Lite is a communication tablet that is built for literate as well as non-literate users. It has a series of pictures to depict the language that the user is desiring to portray. The Springboard Lite comes with male and female voices built in. It has bluetooth capability and is compatible with computers for uploading pictures. Springboard Lite uses "Unity language" which helps guide language based on pictures.
Different combinations of these pictures help the computer determine an action and to build a sentence and then the computer will use its voice to verbalize that communication. Springboard lite can also act a as remote for electronic devices and is compatible with MP3, WMA, and WAV files and access methods include, direct selection; single- or dual-switch scanning; USB connectivity allows use of headpointing systems, mouse, USB joystick and mouse emulation access products.
Communication boards are example of low-tech AAC Devices. According to the Bridge School website, "Communication boards make language visible and accessible for individuals who have speech impairments. These low-technology communication displays consist of photographs, symbols, words/phrases or a combination of all three. Typically, multiple communication boards are developed to address both specific and generic vocabulary needs in a variety of contexts." Communication boards have color coded sections that help its user locate the page for the topic that is being communicated. This page will then have several options to point to state what the user wishes to portray.
In addition to a myriad of devices available on the market, there are software and hardware solutions. An example of a hardware solution for user with accessibility issues is the EyePro GS from Words+.
The EyePro GS is similar to the Tobii in that it uses eye gazing to predict words and language patterns from the user. This can be used with any Windows computer of communication device. The EyePro GS helps users that are unable to handle a mouse, buttons, or even a head wand.
The EyePro GS is made by Words+ who are also creators of communication software. E Z Keys is one of the software programs by Words+. According to their website, "EZ Keys allows the literate user to do everything from typing a letter, to engaging in conversation with a friend, to exploring the worldwide web. World-renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking uses the software to deliver lectures around the world, while a nine-year-old boy uses it to talk with friends and to participate in classroom activities at his school in Louisiana." This software is valuable because it is built not only for users who can use a mouse or keyboard but also for those who cannot. It is built to work with eye gazing technology.
Different combinations of these pictures help the computer determine an action and to build a sentence and then the computer will use its voice to verbalize that communication. Springboard lite can also act a as remote for electronic devices and is compatible with MP3, WMA, and WAV files and access methods include, direct selection; single- or dual-switch scanning; USB connectivity allows use of headpointing systems, mouse, USB joystick and mouse emulation access products.
Communication boards are example of low-tech AAC Devices. According to the Bridge School website, "Communication boards make language visible and accessible for individuals who have speech impairments. These low-technology communication displays consist of photographs, symbols, words/phrases or a combination of all three. Typically, multiple communication boards are developed to address both specific and generic vocabulary needs in a variety of contexts." Communication boards have color coded sections that help its user locate the page for the topic that is being communicated. This page will then have several options to point to state what the user wishes to portray.
In addition to a myriad of devices available on the market, there are software and hardware solutions. An example of a hardware solution for user with accessibility issues is the EyePro GS from Words+.
The EyePro GS is similar to the Tobii in that it uses eye gazing to predict words and language patterns from the user. This can be used with any Windows computer of communication device. The EyePro GS helps users that are unable to handle a mouse, buttons, or even a head wand.The EyePro GS is made by Words+ who are also creators of communication software. E Z Keys is one of the software programs by Words+. According to their website, "EZ Keys allows the literate user to do everything from typing a letter, to engaging in conversation with a friend, to exploring the worldwide web. World-renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking uses the software to deliver lectures around the world, while a nine-year-old boy uses it to talk with friends and to participate in classroom activities at his school in Louisiana." This software is valuable because it is built not only for users who can use a mouse or keyboard but also for those who cannot. It is built to work with eye gazing technology.
Journal #8 / MI
Ferrell, K. (2011, August). Find the truth about the pacific tree octopus. Learning and Leading WITH TECHNOLOGY, 39(1), Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/learn/publications/learning-and-leading/digital-edition-august-2011.aspx
With the explosion of information on the internet, it is important that children learn that not all information they find on the web is accurate. There are truths, jokes, slight of hand, accurate, and misinformed sites. My goddaughter and I were talking about Wikipedia today. Hannah is entering high school this month and she told me how her teacher had told her never to use Wikipedia for information in research because anyone can edit it. She is right to a certain extent. We were discussing the actual timeframe of Billie Holliday's career which I argued could actually be accurately discovered on Wikipedia. I explained that she was correct about some information that could be found on Wikipedia. Anything she could find that seems opinionated or theoretical could be quite inaccurate and she probably should never use anything from Wikipedia for a cited reference in research. However, some straight facts such as dates and numbers are probably okay.
In Find the Truth About the Pacific Tree Octopus, the teacher had built a lesson for his students to realize that not all information on the web is accurate. They learned how to interpret information by looking at who, what, where, when, and why. They also learned to double check the URL suffixes. This is critical thinking skills that need to be understood when attempting to research on the web by search engines. The lesson learned was quite valuable. The students need to know that they believe all that they read!
What other ways not specified can help ensure accuracy from internet resources?
It seems that one important way to double check information from the web is to cross reference. If you find one site with certain information on sea monkeys, don't consider it accurate until you find at least one other site with the same information on sea monkeys. As the internet expands, and if possible, it is better to have even more than two references to the facts you research.
Even if the students ask who, what, where, when and why, how will they know that the source is accurate?
I supposed asking the who is not enough in itself but if the student can identify the who, then they can research the who. If the author of the research information is identified as a credible author, or otherwise some kind of authority on the subject then it can by deemed credible.
As a note to end on this subject, I can remember a chain email I got a few years back that claimed that a link could take a picture of you even without a webcam. The email told you to sit back and smile before you click the link. Once you click the link, you get a picture of a monkey. I guess you have to be a monkey to believe everything you get on the internet.
With the explosion of information on the internet, it is important that children learn that not all information they find on the web is accurate. There are truths, jokes, slight of hand, accurate, and misinformed sites. My goddaughter and I were talking about Wikipedia today. Hannah is entering high school this month and she told me how her teacher had told her never to use Wikipedia for information in research because anyone can edit it. She is right to a certain extent. We were discussing the actual timeframe of Billie Holliday's career which I argued could actually be accurately discovered on Wikipedia. I explained that she was correct about some information that could be found on Wikipedia. Anything she could find that seems opinionated or theoretical could be quite inaccurate and she probably should never use anything from Wikipedia for a cited reference in research. However, some straight facts such as dates and numbers are probably okay.In Find the Truth About the Pacific Tree Octopus, the teacher had built a lesson for his students to realize that not all information on the web is accurate. They learned how to interpret information by looking at who, what, where, when, and why. They also learned to double check the URL suffixes. This is critical thinking skills that need to be understood when attempting to research on the web by search engines. The lesson learned was quite valuable. The students need to know that they believe all that they read!
What other ways not specified can help ensure accuracy from internet resources?
It seems that one important way to double check information from the web is to cross reference. If you find one site with certain information on sea monkeys, don't consider it accurate until you find at least one other site with the same information on sea monkeys. As the internet expands, and if possible, it is better to have even more than two references to the facts you research.
Even if the students ask who, what, where, when and why, how will they know that the source is accurate?
I supposed asking the who is not enough in itself but if the student can identify the who, then they can research the who. If the author of the research information is identified as a credible author, or otherwise some kind of authority on the subject then it can by deemed credible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)