3.6 Selecting and Evaluating Digital Tools & Resources
Candidates collaborate with teachers and administrators to select and evaluate digital tools and resources for accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure. (PSC 3.6/ISTE 3f)
Candidates collaborate with teachers and administrators to select and evaluate digital tools and resources for accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure. (PSC 3.6/ISTE 3f)
In the artifact before you—the Emerging Technology Project from ITEC 7445—I review the technology tool VoiceThread and evaluate its fit for my school. In order to do this, I consider the features of the platform, the tools and hardware my school has already purchased, the staff’s readiness to learn and adopt the tool, as well as any continuing support staff may need. In order to determine if the tool would enhance learning for my standards, students, and grade level, I pilot tested the technology with the help of my technology specialist. Overall, I decided that VoiceThread is a good fit for our student population. The presentation, above, is a pitch for our school to purchase VoiceThread licensing. While I was the sole creator of this artifact, I worked closely with my school’s technology specialist to design a lesson that incorporates this tool as well as to implement a lesson using this technology in my classroom.
This artifact demonstrates mastery of Standard 3.6: Selecting and Evaluating Digital Tools & Resources. While selecting and evaluating VoiceThread, I worked closely with my school’s technology team in order to determine accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure. During the pilot of the VoiceThread lesson my technology coach and I created together, we observed students working in groups to post their multimedia responses to the discussion board. We wanted to know if this tool would be a value add to our existing Learning Management System’s (LMS) offerings. We also wanted to determine if the technology is appropriate for content-area suitability and age appropriateness; it was in both cases. Additionally, the tool was compatible with our school-issued Chromebooks, which was our biggest concern.
Based on the pilot test we ran, I felt confident recommending VoiceThread to our administrative team. Furthermore, the technology specialist I worked with used my class as a model in a presentation on VoiceThread at our district’s annual technology conference. However, since this artifact was created, the updates to our school’s LMS, which now include video and audio features in the discussion forum, have made the purchase of VoiceThread less attractive, since we already have functionally similar tools.
From completing this artifact, I have learned that selecting and evaluating digital tools for purchase is a complex and ever-evolving process that requires a careful inventory of the technology student and teacher have as well as what might be most useful to adopt. Since often these decisions are expensive ones, it’s important to get it right. If I were to do something differently to improve the quality of the artifact, I would have offered more cons of the emergent technology. As is, my pitch is very one-sidedly in favor of VoiceThread, which is a cool tool, but a costly one for my school to purchase. I should have been a more critical consumer.
The work that went into creating the artifact has impacted school improvement since my collaboration with the technology coach led to observational data that helped her future recommendations in coaching others to use the tool. The impact can be assessed by surveying teachers and students about the outcome of engagement and learning while using this tool.
This artifact demonstrates mastery of Standard 3.6: Selecting and Evaluating Digital Tools & Resources. While selecting and evaluating VoiceThread, I worked closely with my school’s technology team in order to determine accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure. During the pilot of the VoiceThread lesson my technology coach and I created together, we observed students working in groups to post their multimedia responses to the discussion board. We wanted to know if this tool would be a value add to our existing Learning Management System’s (LMS) offerings. We also wanted to determine if the technology is appropriate for content-area suitability and age appropriateness; it was in both cases. Additionally, the tool was compatible with our school-issued Chromebooks, which was our biggest concern.
Based on the pilot test we ran, I felt confident recommending VoiceThread to our administrative team. Furthermore, the technology specialist I worked with used my class as a model in a presentation on VoiceThread at our district’s annual technology conference. However, since this artifact was created, the updates to our school’s LMS, which now include video and audio features in the discussion forum, have made the purchase of VoiceThread less attractive, since we already have functionally similar tools.
From completing this artifact, I have learned that selecting and evaluating digital tools for purchase is a complex and ever-evolving process that requires a careful inventory of the technology student and teacher have as well as what might be most useful to adopt. Since often these decisions are expensive ones, it’s important to get it right. If I were to do something differently to improve the quality of the artifact, I would have offered more cons of the emergent technology. As is, my pitch is very one-sidedly in favor of VoiceThread, which is a cool tool, but a costly one for my school to purchase. I should have been a more critical consumer.
The work that went into creating the artifact has impacted school improvement since my collaboration with the technology coach led to observational data that helped her future recommendations in coaching others to use the tool. The impact can be assessed by surveying teachers and students about the outcome of engagement and learning while using this tool.