Standard 3.6 Selective and Evaluating Digital Tools & ResourcesCandidates 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) ![]()
|
This presentation was created in the spring of 2016 for ITEC 7445. The presentation focuses on Google Classroom. In particular I wanted to introduce Google Classroom and show how Google Classroom could be leveraged within an existing LMS. The reason for this strategy was twofold. One, I had a presentation coming up for district leadership and we are heavily invested in D2L so direct competition from another product (especially a free one) is not welcome. Second, I feel strongly that more thought needs to be given to how multiple products used in an educational setting coexist. Overall the presentation gives a good overview of the pros and cons of Google Classroom as well as strategies for how it can leveraged within a broader ecosystem.
Standard 3.6 covers the selection and evaluation of digital tools and resources. As I completed this presentation for my district, I paid attention to the sustainability, and compatibility of GAFE in general and Google Classroom in particular within an education framework. In addition, I included data on the security of GAFE, privacy concerns, benefits to student learning, possible plans for implementation and provided other information that might help administrators make decisions on the viability of this resource within their schools.
During the completion of this project and continuing well into the presentation itself I learned much about the importance of responsible evaluation of all technological resources before selection and implementation. The rallying cry for GAFE has largely consisted of “it’s free!” During some of the process I played the part of devil’s advocate so I might anticipate issues raised by other school leaders. Thinking about the cons as well as the pros of “free” proved invaluable to the success of my presentation. In the future, I would like to include data on Chromebooks and one-to-one initiatives as both come up in any discussion of GAFE and Google Classroom these days.
I am as guilty as the next school leader of the rush to “free” products. School budgets are tight and have not grown even as economic recovery has taken root. However, using a technology without thoroughly evaluating and researching can still be dangerous even if that product appears to be “free.” As anyone who has been in the field for any length of time will tell you: “nothing is free.” The benefit to learning must be demonstrable to enable accountability and to insure that precious instructional time is not being wasted. I believe that only be collaborating with technology support, network and school administrators, teachers and other school leaders can we can reach well-reasoned, intelligent decisions about the accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure of a digital tool or resource. These same stakeholder must also be leveraged to judge and assess the impact on student learning, professional development, and school improvement.
Standard 3.6 covers the selection and evaluation of digital tools and resources. As I completed this presentation for my district, I paid attention to the sustainability, and compatibility of GAFE in general and Google Classroom in particular within an education framework. In addition, I included data on the security of GAFE, privacy concerns, benefits to student learning, possible plans for implementation and provided other information that might help administrators make decisions on the viability of this resource within their schools.
During the completion of this project and continuing well into the presentation itself I learned much about the importance of responsible evaluation of all technological resources before selection and implementation. The rallying cry for GAFE has largely consisted of “it’s free!” During some of the process I played the part of devil’s advocate so I might anticipate issues raised by other school leaders. Thinking about the cons as well as the pros of “free” proved invaluable to the success of my presentation. In the future, I would like to include data on Chromebooks and one-to-one initiatives as both come up in any discussion of GAFE and Google Classroom these days.
I am as guilty as the next school leader of the rush to “free” products. School budgets are tight and have not grown even as economic recovery has taken root. However, using a technology without thoroughly evaluating and researching can still be dangerous even if that product appears to be “free.” As anyone who has been in the field for any length of time will tell you: “nothing is free.” The benefit to learning must be demonstrable to enable accountability and to insure that precious instructional time is not being wasted. I believe that only be collaborating with technology support, network and school administrators, teachers and other school leaders can we can reach well-reasoned, intelligent decisions about the accuracy, suitability, and compatibility with the school technology infrastructure of a digital tool or resource. These same stakeholder must also be leveraged to judge and assess the impact on student learning, professional development, and school improvement.