The presentations today as a whole were great. There were some things however, that were of notable success. I really liked the fact that Andy used a “recap” or “rewind” slide to sum up all that was previously covered. Several of the presentations included this and I believe it worked well. I also liked how Mikey, Andrew, and Alison used audience participation to make their presentations a classroom discussion tool. That seemed to work very well and functionally, it had appeal because the answers were not listed right from the beginning. I also really enjoyed Paul’s use of animations and sound to make the slides seem to pop! His theme for the presentation also worked extremely well. He also started with a video, which made his presentation engaging and started off moving quickly.
There weren’t many things to complain about during these presentations. Aside from a few technical difficulties they all went well. Some slides had poor color contrast and were difficult to read, color and especially compliment become extremely important when the slide gets into small text. Overall though, people really had some great layouts that maybe have just needed a small amount of polishing to make perfect. I think the only large critique I can give is the importance of simple slides. When paragraphs or large bodies of text were displayed it tended to make the slide confusing and illegible. If a presenter had a large amount of text to present it might be best to read it, while displaying only the salient points.
After looking at other presentation I have only a few things I might change. I liked having my notes to read from, yet I could have added a few words to each to maybe clarify rules or dimensions to each shape. I also really liked the use of review slides and felt that my presentation would have done better with a few less slides and a recap at the end. I liked this as a function to sum up presentation and make sure all the material was covered twice.
I like using PowerPoint. It seems to function well and has the ability to display a lot of material quickly and simply. I can see the advantage of addressing crucial topics throughout a lesson or lecture while still having students fill in the blanks. It also seemed to work well when framing games or exercises that included rules. I can see this being a very functional tool when trying to get through direct methods of teaching. I worry that setting the stage to a dark room will put kids to sleep. It may also have the affect of causing some students to wander or drift because the material is so easy to access; they may not pay attention as closely. These aren’t considerations that would make me rethink using PowerPoint. I see its value and plan to use it as an integral teaching tool.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Social Justice - Technology in the Classroom.
Assessing the use of technology in and out of the classroom has to be carefully considered. When access outside the classroom is limited, the teacher has a crucial dilemma in implementation. If you demand the use of technology, then you place the burden on students who have limited access. If you don’t encourage use, then you are indirectly disengaging the use of technology as a life skill. Both articles point out the severity of technology as a digital divider, however, one chooses to empower, the other chooses independent success by using societal-provided tools. Although the library, community centers, and clubs provide computer access, the realistic view is that attaching expectations of technology use can seriously put students in a lower S.E.S. at a disadvantage.
Teachers, who provide proportionate use to technology inside the classroom, should strive to offer this to those students who are appropriately disadvantaged. This must be done with the understanding that some students may feel isolated or cut-off from the class as a whole. Suggestions for some teachers are helpful but for schools who have limited access to technology, e.g.: computer lab or instructional help centers, need to be aware tools such as spell-check and Google can greatly aid one student, while providing disparity to another. Grades on papers and assignments must willfully consider if these technologies are limited or unavailable.
I believe that deny or purposefully excluding technology from the curriculum is dangers. However, there needs to be a strong consideration for what is available as a whole. If you are in a school that has a single computer lab for 1200 students, that is not reasonable access when compared to a similarly sized school with seven staffed labs. So, as important technology is for future successes and future endeavors; district and school budgets must be considered by teachers for contextual reasons.
The future of industry and vocation will include technology. Jobs are obviously predicted to mostly technology based in the next 20 years. Teachers are responsible for bridging this education gap-as long as that is looked out through the eyes of equality and not at the sacrifice of equitable education. One way to mitigate this disparity would be to take a class survey, anonymously, at the beginning of the year and indentify those students with limited technology access. The instructor could then develop a plan to find local access points within the community and also add structured time during class where students could make use of schools limited facilities. Although this may not level the playing field--It would aid in closing the gap.
With regards to social justice, teachers can also take steps to help their students gain access to technology within the community. There are many programs setup in Portland that students can volunteer with and be given credit to purchase a refurbished computer. If a teacher can target those students in need, they can help align them with these program and also programs that offer discounted internet access or free educational programs. Open Office and Linux are great resources that have aided in the free or low-cost market.
As educators, we should strive to prepare students for the future. We must do so with a careful context for those we are educating. This problem exists in the classroom but really needs to be addressed in the larger context of district and regional levels. If we don’t have the resources to fund children appropriately, we cannot reasonably expect the teachers to pick-up the slack.
Teachers, who provide proportionate use to technology inside the classroom, should strive to offer this to those students who are appropriately disadvantaged. This must be done with the understanding that some students may feel isolated or cut-off from the class as a whole. Suggestions for some teachers are helpful but for schools who have limited access to technology, e.g.: computer lab or instructional help centers, need to be aware tools such as spell-check and Google can greatly aid one student, while providing disparity to another. Grades on papers and assignments must willfully consider if these technologies are limited or unavailable.
I believe that deny or purposefully excluding technology from the curriculum is dangers. However, there needs to be a strong consideration for what is available as a whole. If you are in a school that has a single computer lab for 1200 students, that is not reasonable access when compared to a similarly sized school with seven staffed labs. So, as important technology is for future successes and future endeavors; district and school budgets must be considered by teachers for contextual reasons.
The future of industry and vocation will include technology. Jobs are obviously predicted to mostly technology based in the next 20 years. Teachers are responsible for bridging this education gap-as long as that is looked out through the eyes of equality and not at the sacrifice of equitable education. One way to mitigate this disparity would be to take a class survey, anonymously, at the beginning of the year and indentify those students with limited technology access. The instructor could then develop a plan to find local access points within the community and also add structured time during class where students could make use of schools limited facilities. Although this may not level the playing field--It would aid in closing the gap.
With regards to social justice, teachers can also take steps to help their students gain access to technology within the community. There are many programs setup in Portland that students can volunteer with and be given credit to purchase a refurbished computer. If a teacher can target those students in need, they can help align them with these program and also programs that offer discounted internet access or free educational programs. Open Office and Linux are great resources that have aided in the free or low-cost market.
As educators, we should strive to prepare students for the future. We must do so with a careful context for those we are educating. This problem exists in the classroom but really needs to be addressed in the larger context of district and regional levels. If we don’t have the resources to fund children appropriately, we cannot reasonably expect the teachers to pick-up the slack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)