WebQuest Evaluation

So far today, I attempted to redirect Noah to play with his National Geographic jeep, ranger, and animals only to boot up my archaic laptop more than four times because he unplugged it while yelling, "No, Mama. Mama play! Mama play trucks. I watch owl movie. No Mama. No homework.", saved my American Constitutional Foundations text from a full mug of steaming hot coffee that he dumped on it, and settled my frightened Huskador after she endured the wrath of an energetic 25 month old that apparently wanted to ride her like a pony. After all of the craziness, I finally scoured the WebQuest link for something relatively useful. Um, I am fairly sure out of the 70 pages of K2 Social Studies webquests, there are a handful of legitimately worthy webquests. The remainder are ridiculous and I would never use them in a classroom... 

http://questgarden.com/118/71/0/110208083251/

1. The introduction reading level is lower than most of the webquests I viewed and I find that this is a strength as I searched K2 Social Studies webquests that generated some results with disproportionately high reading levels (beyond middle school!?) If the webquest is a student-centered activity, I question the appropriateness of writing the activity at a different level than that of the intended audience. Unfortunately, if I am targeting language as a strength, I might as well also target it as a negative attribute as well. I found a few grammatical errors and redundant statements that may cloud the clarity of the instructions, including, "Today as we travel through the lands, all of you will discover rivers, lands, mountains, and a fun adventure. There might be some pictures, and activities that everyone can participate in. Although we live in a big world, this site will cover only a small portion of what you all will be learning and exploring."  I would prefer a different statement that really engaged the learners, maybe through a "you are driving across the country on an adventure during which you will discover mountains, rivers, prairies, etc" 

2. Immediately, I noticed that the webquest originally stated the target area of the entire United States but the task page detailed that only the Western States would be mastered by the end of the task. Furthermore, although an image of these states is posted on the page, it lacks the components of a map that I imagine would be required for the learners to include on their finished products. Again, there is a lack of clarity in what the students should acquire by the end of the lesson. I could not identify positive attributes of this specific page besides the neat compass visual.

3. The Process page indicates a timeline that will aid learners in completely tasks within the range. Overall, I feel that the creator of the page attempted to level the writing to K2 but rather than simplifying language, the author skewed the information provided to students. 

4. Resources are limited to three sites and although the teacher indicated that the learners would receive all of the knowledge previous to the webquest, the learners are not informed of how they will receive this knowledge. I would perhaps include "through reading our textbook Chapter X, Section X, we will learn the cardinal directions, what a major landmark is, etc." Or video that is found online, etc. Three sites seems rather limited in scope--there are plenty of resources that the students could explore especially given the two weeks they have for the assignment.

5. The rubric page actually is well-done. I think that each learner could effectively know what is demanded of him/her after reading the rubric page rather than the process page! My only concern is that the author suggested the power of working together as a group but I do not see the measure of participation on the rubric page. 

6. The conclusion offered a section for recommended changes and perhaps what the learners struggled with during the assignment. I like this aspect of the webquest since it is an activity, as indicated in our reading on 13 ed online, that may be used in the future and tweaked as needed, made more challenging each time, etc. Even if it is through a verbal discussion measure as the learners as K2 target audience, it could really positively shape the direction of the webquest.

In the end, I could definitely utilize the concept of this particular webquest but there is no way I would ever use it without heavy modification in my classroom. Perhaps I am just grumpy today or maybe I just really REALLY care about thoroughness in instruction but I honestly feel as though most of the webquests for Social Studies straight up sucked. I can foresee the validity of using an engaging, student-centered assignment such as the webquest but unless it is written well, it is a failure in integrating technology into the curriculum. 

Children's Literature Classics Read Aloud Online

Michigan ELA GLCE: L.RP.00.02 listen to or view knowledgeably, and respond thoughtfully to both classic and contemporary texts recognized for quality and literary merit


MDE METS-S: PK-2.TC.6. understand that technology is a tool to help him/her complete a task, and is a source of information, learning, and entertainment. 


I anticipate that I will eventually teach at the K2 level but not in the state of Michigan. For ease of this assignment, I am referring to the Michigan ELA GLCE for Kindergarten. I chose the specific standard posted above since I located a plethora of classics read online, including a stop-motion video of "Frog and Toad are Friends." I am interested in teaching the perception that computers, when utilized to browse the internet, are not merely sources of entertainment but sources of information that can enhance the learning experience. My caveat is simply that I did not view stories that transcribed the text--I am hesitant to entirely play a stop-motion video such as "Frog and Toad" without visually pairing the text so that learners may work on word recognition as well.  At the K level, I understand that read-aloud stories are a significant source of literature  exposure but I would feel most comfortable streaming a video with text.

To counteract the lack of text paired with video, or perhaps a less drastic tone may consist of, "measure"   learner acquisition of the content, I would implement a whole-group, student-led (but teacher prompted, of course) review session following the online short video. Retelling is a significant measure of understanding a text. Based on my experience with the literacy program I formerly worked with, I recall that children who hear more words, whether in conversation or via books read to them, are more likely to succeed at learning to read as their vocabulary skills are greater than peers without these experiences in the home, etc. My ultimate hope in teaching children that computers offer far more than cartoons on nick jr but classic and contemporary texts read online or streamed as a video would be that the kids who do not share the same experiences as peers with at-home situations that offer multitudes of contact with vocabulary and reading may receive some input they are missing. I am of course assuming that these children would also possess at-home internet services and computers but in my experiences thus far, I also lived in a city that had wireless. Philadelphia FTW.

Blog Response Comment #2

http://educationtechnologyblog.com/2011/10/free-makeuseof-guides-and-cheat-sheets/#comment-950
The comment stated that it is awaiting moderation...

Tech in Early Ed Blog Comment

http://www.edact.com/blog/?p=139#comment-281

EDT 619 Blog One

The most technologically advanced item in my classroom hangs on the wall... Our computer left our room in April due to a need in the staff resource room. I spend my interactive time with my 3 year old preschoolers mainly redirecting and modeling prosocial behaviors as the center's curriculum, play-based, does not allow for much integration of technology. While my statement appears paradoxical since a computer could easily fit into free choice center time (aka free play that occurs three times each day), as the solo staff member in the afternoon, I am not capable of facilitating an individual computer based activity while managing the needs of our learners. I am saddened by the lack of tech in my classroom since the kids are really aware of computers, ipods, cell phones, and even tablets. When I observe or interact during dramatic play or manipulatives at science-math table, their play reflects what is modeled in the home. (It is often hysterical to hear what effortlessly flows out of a three year old at work.)  With three year olds, however, I would need to examine tech that can keep up with the physical nature of kids that are mostly at the end of toddlerhood transitioning to an age what most would consider 'preschool.' (I am not going to lie--I have some emotionally immature students at the moment and they struggle with impulsivity issues. Our academic and play items experience tragic ends at times. I loathe thinking that I need to restrict integrating tech because of 'x' behavior and whatnot.) 

Without a doubt my instructional time could be different if I had access even to a computer. Singing with the kids, especially Zoophonics, is fun and amazing but with such little instructional time, I wouldn't mind if it was more effective than my current 15 minutes. Yes, that is the time I spend with my learners completing academics such as emerging literacy skills, basic math like counting, etc at circle time. The remainder of the time throughout the day is spent monitoring/redirecting/managing behaviors and when I am lucky, interacting during center choice time. I have no idea what resources are available for early childhood and from that, what may be a good fit for the curriculum that I need to teach.

I know the technology I use on a daily basis fairly well. Of course this statement is rather logical but I also know what I use is very limited. Although I am enrolled in this class as a demand for the GTC program, I am hopeful, as a preservice teacher, to gain more than just what I need to know as outlined in the course.  I tend to rely on empirically supported ideas, whether due to my background in Psych-Spec Ed or due to my nature. What I hope to really discover is comparative and argumentative ideas for certain methodology and integration over not using tech or a certain program vs another. I read a lot of random articles via my phone as I am routinely awake past 2 AM and have a great deal of exposure to ideas but without foundation at this time. Perhaps I am just naturally skeptical or reluctant to believe simply because of hearing or reading something but I also love knowing that I can rely on something based on a solid foundation, that it works because of xyz versus something else. What I mean by this is simply--just because I hear it, see it, use it does not mean I believe in its utility in the classroom--MY future classroom. I do not want a lack of confidence or to allow my ego to cloud my judgment. I simply want to know--does it work for MOST learners? How does it work? Why? What about the others that may not filter information based on 'x' methodology. 

One of the greatest attributes for my teaching career is my experience at CA Frost. Those teachers and admins were crazy phenomenal. My only caveat to that statement is when I left my contract position in Aug. 2007, I had yet to witness tech beyond a laptop in the classroom. Even when I returned from Philadelphia the next year, and of course went right back to working in GRPS and KISD as a long-term substitute luckily, there were no smartboards or other teaching tools I could play around with in the classroom. As much as I use tech at home, I am currently playing catch-up and it is NOT a game that I am enjoying. If you review all of my experiences, they are varied and provide a solid foundation but they are no longer adequate to secure a position in the market as tech trends increase. Admins are not demanding tech savvy staff simply because it is marketable for the district rather it is because that is where we are in the world.