Stixy

This is the address for my stixy with 10 notes. Five for articles and five for 2.0 tools.

http://www.stixy.com/guest/149916

This is my paper. I could not get it to upload like it is in word. Thus I just copied and pasted!

Read 6100 Fall 2011 Five Articles and Five 2.0 Web Tools Joel H. Powers This paper involves five articles either published online or published in journals and then transmitted to the internet. They are varying in their language and target audience. The language flows between that for the layman and professional educators depending on the targeted audience, and they demonstrate validity for a wide range of age groups from K-12 education, government, and industry to the post college workforce. It also involves 5 different web 2.0 tools with possible literacy increasing applications. The first article “Instructional Approaches Used to Integrate Literacy and Technology” (2000) by Elizabeth A. Baker is a well written paper for the academic community. However, if you are not in academia, the writing style is a weakness since professional articles are difficult to read and understand. Many in the professional community will understand and appreciate the author’s point of view. The very ones who need to read and understand it won’t because of its academic language. For the study, Baker followed a specific group of fourth graders through a whole year of technology based instruction. She was looking for problems with technology saturation and integration. Each child in her test group had their own personal computer and the classroom had various other technologies. In the end, she concluded that even with the availability of a saturated technological environment there were still problems with classroom technology integration which included recognizing the quality of internet sources, students creating substantive products, inaccurate information and student reports, and student privacy. “Twenty-first Century Literacy and Technology in K-8 Classrooms” (2005), an article by June Brown, Jan Bryan, and Ted Brown is less of an academic production for the academic community. It is geared more for the layman, a strength for me, and is more of a discussion of general problems that the technology boom has created for education, the workforce, and our federal government. The authors open with the tech boom and how educational instruction must change to keep up. They discuss the adoption of different models by education and the impact of government, industry, and the workforce on the necessity for technological literacy. After a brief sweep of technology in recent history the article concludes with their idea of the role that technology does play now and may play in the future. The next article, “Tech Literacy Confusion-What Should You Measure? (2009)” by Andrew Trotter is the article that is the most controversial of those I have read. It is also, in some ways, the most truthful and deals with technology integration in a realistic way. The author realizes the speed of technology change and the myriad of different forms of it in the market and within reach of young people. They must not only become literate in traditional ways but in many other technological ways of which some haven’t even come into existence. Education, government, industry, science, civic watchdog, and other groups have their own idea of literacy and how much technology is needed to achieve it. Each wants to measure it and control it in the light of their beliefs and needs. How can it be controlled without censorship and be safe for young people to use it freely? Many questions arise when the future of technology in education and literacy is discussed. In the article the question arises about consistency measuring what technological literacy is. There is no one definition for it which is a large problem in a Country that needs a definition consistency for all states and educational programs in the K-12, collegiate, and professional level of technological literacy. Another article “Enhancing Adolescent Literacy Achievement Through Integration of Technology in the Classroom” (2007) by Betty J. Sternberg, Daren A. Kaplan, and Jennifer Borck is aimed at educators for adolescents. Originally published in “Reading Research Quarterly” and reproduced via internet, this article promotes further research in technology and education. The article does raise valid questions about how technology is used. Do we have literate students using technology to become more literate or do we use technology as the tool to make students literate? Or as stated by the authors, “These technologies are seen both as a facilitator and a medium of literacy teaching and learning. ”Effective adolescent literacy programs therefore should use technology as both an instructional tool and an instructional topic" (Sternberg, Kaplan, and Borck) pp. 416-420. Is it a tool or topic? They would like something done to stop what they call a “literacy crisis”. The fifth and final article “A Case Study for Teaching Information Literacy Skills” by Karl Kingsly and Karla Kingsley deals primarily with post collegiate medical students but is relevant to any occupation. Their focus is that adults, even young adults who grew up with technology readily available, are still technologically deficient because of the speed at which technology is changing. Continued education is necessary even after entering the workforce because of the rate of change. This also leads them to believe technology must be taught by someone who knows it. Students may have knowledge about technology but that does not make it useful to them unless they are taught how to apply that knowledge to their field of work. The authors say professors either don’t have the willingness or don’t have enough know-how to be at ease “in technology-intensive environments” (Kingsley and Kingsley). They feel the student may know more than them, but do the students have the “knowledge and critical thinking skills to effectively locate, filter, and evaluate information found online”. The authors complete the article with their assertion that even graduate level students need to be in technology intensive programs that promote literacy in a specific field. Teachers are continually in need of tech education so this article does hit home. The first of the five 2.0 web tools was Yourdraft.com. This site promotes collaborative writing in public or with specific co-authors. It is free. The work area is incredibly like Microsoft Word. Allowing collaborative writing can be a positive for most all students. Different ideas and ways of completing projects are always a plus for writing creation and this is one strength of the site. Two heads trying to solve a problem or write are better than one. I thought this would be possible for classroom implementation if at least half the students had an e-mail to use. I did a lot of web searching for a web tool that involved video. Video production often requires more tech equipment than most students have available. This definitely is a negative for classroom implementation. Another negative is the video production and editing process is time consuming making it difficult for today’s pressured teacher to take the time to learn and implement the process. The site I found was Masher.com which touted the ability to let you create a video by mashing together video clips. You can also add music tracks and photos and you can do it all for free! I can’t say I tried it. Until I started looking for a web tool dealing with podcasts, I didn’t actually know what a podcast was. After I learned the definition, it was much easier to understand how this would be possible. In searching, I found my third web tool, Podbean.com. Podbean is an online tool to create and publish a podcast. They may be tagged to be searched from the internet. They may be music or an audio about any subject. The podcast may be created, refined, and published from the one site. I can see some education implementation for podcasts. Students must practice oral speech (literacy), record it in a manner that will let them critique and improve, and then publish it to the internet. Any time a student will critique to improve their own work that is important to them, it is a good thing. Still implementing time is a problem. Another web tool, the fourth that drew my attention was Studystack.com. This site uses your information to make digital flash cards. Many cards were already available for use on the site. The cards (as many sets as you wish to create) are available digitally through many tech avenues (ipods, iphones, etc.) The site would even use the same data to make other kinds of games for the students to study the same material in different ways. The implementation of this has the problem of an educator finding the time to create the cards. It would be accessible to students with digital devices but all students don’t have this technology available. Using what they like to use to study is a good idea. Mindmeister.com is the last 2.0 web tool on my list. This site creates visual aids and diagrams for mind mapping and creating. It narrows or broadens topics alone or in groups. It was free and somewhat easy to use. It promotes collaboration for it allows more than one person/student to create or brainstorm ideas at a time. The participants may make connections linearly (time order, by procedure, or around a core subject as in a Venn or spider diagram) using time or any other form of “connections” to map the subject. Time to learn the procedures would be one drawback along with having enough equipment for students to use. <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 15px;">I have given a brief overview of five articles and have reviewed many more trying to accomplish the objective set before me. I don’t like professional articles because they are difficult to understand and the very people that need to understand them (parents, lawmakers, people that make decisions) have trouble and sometimes feel “inferior” to educators. The simple articles with simple language reveal the most. I understand that technology is changing rapidly and students must have knowledge of these changes to help them in their world. Technology is very important in tomorrow’s job market. I agree that technology should be one tool of many to become literate but I am still traditional. If students are successful at literacy in traditional ways then they have the tools to be successful in technological ways. Technological literacy is also unfair in ways because not everyone has these means available and schools and government can’t afford it for everyone. This class is an exceptional tech learning tool, but not everyone has the opportunity to increase their tech savvy. Educators need to know more than their students. <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 15px;">The 2.0 web tools I have covered seem to have many of the same strengths and weaknesses. Technology takes the proper hardware, software, time, expertise, and structured planning to implement properly and gain the desired result which is improved student literacy from kindergarten to the post collegiate workforce. Students and teachers need resources and training to become effective educators and learners. I don’t think we are at the point that we have these things in place. We can only continue to build on the positive and get better at what we do as students and educators.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'arial','sans-serif'; text-align: center;">Bibliography <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Baker, E.A. (2000, July). Instructional approaches used to integrate literacy and technology. //Reading Online, 4//(1). Available: [|**http://www.readingonline.org/articles/baker/**]<span style="font-family: 'arial','sans-serif';"> (retrieved October, 17 2011) [|**http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol1_issue3/Twenty- First_Century_Literacy_and_Technology_in_K-8_Classrooms.pdf**]<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"> (retrieved October 17, 2011) <span style="font-family: 'arial','sans-serif';">Originally published in Innovate ( __http://www.innovateonline.info/__ <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">) as: Brown, <span class="yshortcuts3" style="font-family: 'arial','sans-serif';">J., J <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">. Bryan, and T. Brown. 2005. Twenty-first century literacy and technology in K-8 classrooms. Innovate 1 (3). <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 15px;">Trotter, A. (2009, January) Tech literacy confusion-What should //you// measure? //Education Week//, Vol. 02, Issue 03, Pages 20-22 <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 15px;">(retrieved October 18, 2011) from [] <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Sternberg B., Kaplan K. , Borck J. (Jul. -Sep., 2007), Enhancing adolescent literacy achievement through integration of technology in the classroom. //Reading Research Quarterly//, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 416-420 International: Reading Association Stable. (retrieved October 18, 2011) [|**http://www.jennifersells.writingonlineatcsu.net/literacy_technology/enhancing_ad olescent_literacy.pdf**] <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Kingsley K., and Kingsley K. (2009). A case study for teaching information literacy skills. BMC Education (2009) doi**:** **10.1186/1472-6920-9-7** <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">(retrieved October 19, 2011) [|**http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640392/**]