![]() With so many academic resources available to teachers, it can be difficult to decide how and where they fit into instruction. What process will you use to go about identifying and evaluating active learning software for your classroom? My first step in identifying options for active learning software in the classroom would be to research software options from trusted sources. I have found that Tech & Learning and Vanderbilt have some excellent resources for identifying active learning software that may be of value. For instance, Tech & Learning recommends incorporating Canva and Flickr in the classroom. These are two tools that I think can easily enhance any lesson. When evaluating these tools (using Canva and Flickr as examples) I would consult the Academic Software Evaluation Rubric found in chapter 5 of our text. I will focus on a few items from the rubric in evaluating these tools. Canva and Flickr both get high ratings for cost, because both are free services (though you can also upgrade your Canva account for a fee). Because they are internet software, they also rate highly for the site license category as they do not have to be downloaded and can be freely used by educators without a site license. Installation and hardware for these tools are nonexistent, making them ideal for teachers who have limited technical support available to them. These tools also support active learning, as students will interact with the sites throughout projects to create their own image. Unfortunately, these tools do not offer much in the way of technical support to their users. Each site has a ‘help’ section, but those are strictly self-help recommendations. Luckily, the programs are so easy to use that the teacher should not need much or any technical support when using them, unless the entire site were to crash. Finally, the grade level category of the rubric can be a gray area. It can be difficult to determine exactly what ages should be using these sites. Canva and Flickr are simple enough to use that many age ranges can operate them, but it is ultimately up to the teacher to test the sites to see whether their students are at the correct cognitive level to effectively use them.
3 Comments
The free cost, ease of usability, and variety of implementation methods are what I enjoy the most about Canva. It was recommended to me by the instructional technologist at FranU. Although I have only used it to create cards and flyers, it also has presentation, brochure and other practical applications that I am excited to try.
Reply
Kelly Hudson
6/21/2020 06:36:44 pm
Vetting tech options through trusted sources is critical, particularly given the dizzying array of options and plethora of online 'experts' willing to lead you down the primrose path.
Reply
6/21/2020 07:50:23 pm
Canva gets an A+ from me on cost, ease, and functionality, as well. I have been using Canva since I was an undergraduate student, and I still use in my role in the Graduate School Office. Though I have not used it for presentation capabilities, I have used it to create several graphics for social media, flyers for events, brochures, and other print materials. I would agree that it gets approval ratings in all areas of the rubric provided in chapter 5. I think this rubric is a simple and easy one to follow, yet it is thorough enough to ensure the software you are using is sufficient.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorHello! I am a 25 year old Instructional Blog RollMelanie Bryan
Kathryn Bubrig Ashleigh Bowen Terry Cullum Nicole Musselwhite Mara Chitic-Holmes Derrick Routon Jana Milsap Daleana Phillips Melissa Queen Alan Smith Amelia Watson Lauren DeLaune Lindsey Jones Jonathan Mooneyham Kelly Hudson Archives |