Glogster has a set of templates available to use. I decided to use a timeline template since New Learning is describing a progression through time. The one problem with a standard timeline template, though, is that it creates the allusion that each period/ paradigm stops when the next one starts, but Kalantzis & Cope are careful throughout New Learning to indicate that these paradigms bleed into each other and are prevalent at different times in different places. The standard timeline template didn't allow me to express this nuance. I also have a bone to pick with Glogster about their templates. There are squares that say drop and image or drop a video--but it didn't appear that from that square I could actually include an image or video. I had to go to the top tool bar to do that and then just move the image or video on top of that square. Perhaps I just missed something, but it seemed like those squares were pointless because I couldn't include media from those squares. I did appreciate that I could search for images from Google and videos from YouTube right in the program, though the images in the search results were so small that I had to put an image on my Glog before I could fully see what was in the image. I did like, though, that you could link images out to other sites. As I worked through the chapter, I found I was running out of room to discuss each element of the New Learning knowledge processes, but I was able to link the graphic to this concept to the New Learning website that explains these ideas in more detail.

In terms of classroom use, I don't really see myself using Glogster again, other than a 1 week free trial, this program costs money, and I don't think the process or product of working with it is worth it. Like I said earlier, the program isn't that intuitive, so to have students use it would take a lot of prep work, perhaps creating a quick reference guide for them. Also, I know this has been mentioned before, but I think the "look" within this program is often a bit juvenile.I just feel like some of the other technologies that I have used or seen other people in the class use, can create a more professional product and/or are easier to use to support thinking and collaborating. 

Also, small note: for some reason it keeps changing my ampersands to apostrophes and I have not idea why...

Click here to view my Glogster notes. 

This week I reviewed Heather's use of Socrative and Shantal's use of Scoop.It.

Last spring I went to teaching conference for English teachers at TCC and went to a presentation on Socrative. Like Heather, I was impressed with the ease of use and how you can use it to check in with students to see what they understand and what they don't. I have also used it to create a syllabus "quiz" activity for the first day of class as a more interactive way to touch on important aspects of the syllabus. I didn't realize that Socrative had an app, so I was really appreciative to learn about that. The one challenge I can see with using this program is a problem of access. Unless a class meets in a computer classroom, you have to rely on students having their own laptops, tablets, or smart phones. While most of my students have these devices, I cannot necessarily count on the fact that they will and I don't want a student not to be able to participate because he/she doesn't have access to the technology we are using. 

In terms of Shantal's use of Scoop.It, it was interesting how she used it compared to how some other members of the class used it in previous weeks. While others had used it to collect relevant articles about the topic, Shantal used it exclusively to take her own notes. This reminds me of the control we sometimes have to use a technology in different ways to support our purposes. Shantal was able to use the structure of the program to create really organized, comprehensive,  and easy to follow notes. I was interested in Shantal's suggestion of using it to create a class magazine, making me wonder how collaborative the program is and how easy it is to include images to support the content.