Sunday, November 27, 2011

Loving Web 2.0 tools

Does loving a Web 2.0 tool require research, reflection, and recall?
Research: Brooks-Kirkland shared criteria used for "scoring" the OSLA Great Web 2.0 Face-Off at the 2011 OLA Superconference during a recent webinar I participated in. 
Identified as Types of Learning Boosts from Technology Peterson (2011) lists:
  • motivation
  • learning how to learn
  • efficency
  • creativity and content creator
  • deep understanding of content knowledge
  • assessing what we really value
  • teaching strategies; techniques and organization
Reflection: What do I think about the selected tools?
  • ease of access  (registration, login)
  • learning curve
  • tech support
  • availability using school network
  • intuitive interaction
  • multiple applications: personal, professional, educational
  • student engagement
  • product
Recall: Think back-how did it go?
  • Diigo (LOVE/LOVE)
    • toolbar to capture, highlight, sticky note, bookmark, annotate, share and send
    • group membership and creation
    • tagging
    • PLN! at your finger tips
    • multiple applications professional, personal and educational
  •  Blogger (LOVE) 
    • simple to learn 
    • gadget gallery and embeddable options
    • tagging
    • searchable
    • no school access for student use
    • Flickr (LIKE/LIKE)
      • absolutely worth the time
      • multiple teaching possibilities
      • flickrcc - great source of digital images
      • tagging
    •  Thinglink (LIKE)
      • simple to learn
      • multiple applications
      • PodOmatic (LIKE)
        • simple to learn 
        • recording and hosting
        • tagging
      • Masher (like)
        • drag and drop timeline
        • simple to learn
        • limited length of video
        • glitches in final frames, embedding

          No comments:

          Post a Comment