Category: ETL 501

ETL 501 – Assessment 2 – Reflection post

Theingi Tun on

The information environment is growing and evolving. The advancements in technology of Web 2.0/Web 3.0 means that we have the diversity of technology never imagined in our pedagogy.

Technology can be utilised to create locally produced resources/learning objects

When creating locally produced resources or learning objects utilising technology, I have to consider the thinking introduced by the Pedagogy wheel.  It is designed to enable educators to use technology as an enhancement to focus on delivering the graduate attributes and lifelong skills (Carrington, 2016).

I can use technology such as Google sites and Thinkspace platforms to create learning objects that do the following:

  • A platform to facilitate both online and physical resources
  • Provide multiple access points
  • Extend the space of the library as it is no longer constrained by time and space
  • Create specific content for stakeholders that is easily adaptable to user needs
  • Create resources that are professional, up to date, navigable, and reusable

(Gilbert, 2019)

Technology such as QR code makers, Google Earth, portable devices, Instagram, and WebQuests elevate resources to pursue learning objectives in a fun interactive way(Bates, 2017).My blog post about accessibility reflects upon what I have learnt so far and the future directions I have to take to make resources dynamic and adaptable.

How important is this role for the teacher librarian?

Being visible –When I started the course this year I was very much inspired by the video of Karen Bonnano as mentioned in my blog post about TLs being endangered species. Hence, I strived to be counted and visible. I requested and delivered professional learning using PowerPoints, curated information resources for teachers, submitted articles to online school newsletters and apps, made announcements in Google classrooms, and sent emails with beautifully photographed library displays. All this curation, collaboration, and visibility is possible because of the utilisation of Web2.0/3.0 technology.

Collaborative curation –Curation of content should be an ongoing process through conversation with teaching partners (Spiering & Lechtenberg, 2021) to achieve desired outcomes.

Create disciplinary literacy – As a TL I need to teach and model how knowledge is accessed, retrieved, and used (Spiering & Lechtenberg, 2021). The research guide is also a conduit for 21st century skills such as information literacy. I modelled my search strategies such as using specific terms, finding the right information, evaluation of resources and giving attribution.

Incorporate multiple perspectives –The content presented should be diversified by representing multiple perspectives(Spiering & Lechtenberg, 2021) by utilising the appropriate technology.Tools such as Jamboards (Tun,2022, Sept 11th) are excellent for curation of multiple perspectives.

What I need to do to become a 21st century TL

  • Be information literate. As mentioned in my blog post about search engines, I am still a novice. I need to be abreast of the developments in technologies that support the searching of information.
  • Utilise social media as a tool for achieving meaningful learning outcomes. Blogging, Instagram posts and other social media can be utilised to enhance the connectivity of the school library (Sheko, 2019).
  • Be current regarding issues relating to public domain and copyright (Odonne, 2021).Digital citizenship can be modelled but it must be with the right kind of resources(Odonne, 2022, Sept 26) delivering targeted information as mentioned in this forum discussion(Tun, 2022,Sept 4th).

The possibilities are endless.That is the dynamic nature of my elephant.

References

Bates, L. (2017). 5 brilliant ideas for EdTech scavenger hunts. Fractus Learning. https://www.fractuslearning.com/edtech-scavenger-hunts

Carrington, A. (2016). Educational Technology Solutions. The Padagogy Wheel. https://www.educationtechnologysolutions.com.au/2016/06/padagogy-wheel/

Gilbert, K. (2019). Libguides: In workflow, discovery behaviours and space. Synergy 14(2).

Odonne, K. (2021). Remix, Reuse and Re-energise using Creative Commons and Open Education Resources. https://www.linkinglearning.com.au/remix-reuse-and-re-energise-using-creative-commons-and-open-education-resources/

Sheko, T. (2019). Using the Medium blogging platform to teach critical and digital literacies in art. SCIS Connections (110).

Spiering, J., & Lechtenberg, K. (2021). Rethinking Curation [Article]. Knowledge quest, 49(3), 52-53.

Accessibility

Theingi Tun on

 

When I started looking at guidelines for accessibility, I found it overwhelming. It was hard to navigate and absorb every success criterion. As well intentioned as I might be, I had to concede that all that information is not going to be supplemented in the research guide that I am building. I must do and learn as I go.

I decided to start with the basics. This video was a great start. It is a simple introduction to web accessibility and W3C standards.

The main points I learnt from this video are that to make the resource accessible it should be:

  • Perceivable – users must be able to see and hear it
  • Operable – users can engage with it by typing or voice control
  • Understandable – presented in clear and simple language
  • Robust – can be used in conjunction with different assisted technologies

I also watched another  video about headings. Most of the pages on my research guide have multiple headings. However, it is not enough that I style it in big font and different colours. It must be coded as a heading. When a heading is coded properly, it becomes accessible to keyboard only users, screen users, and people with learning disabilities such as those with short- term memories. To satisfy this requirement, I used the table of contents option to make sure that my headings were visible. The presence of headings is also important. It must have a meaningful hierarchy.

The visual field of readers was also another important fact to consider. I used to think bigger fonts were better. But it is not always true as mentioned in this video. For people with tunnel vision their visual acuity is supported by small fonts, and tighter line spacing.  I will have to explore how to make adjustable fonts on my website. There are big differences in user needs.

The accessibility poster set is another great resource. I learnt to use simple instructions, fonts and colours for the guide. I applied a consistent format across the pages for users on the autistic spectrum.

The final one I would like to mention is this accessible colour scheme builder. It helps you to test out the colour schemes on a website. It is such a handy tool. This video helps to explain how to use it. I use this now as a guide to make the colour scheme of features such as buttons and fonts on my research guide.

Like my elephant, ‘accessibility’ has many facets and perceptions. I am still learning for my elephant. In all its abilities.

References

Accessibility course. (2020). Low vision: Challenging assumptions and understanding differences (from Accessibility course). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUfmCvdzqbM

 

Byrne, R. (2020). A Helpful Tool for Picking a Presentation Color Scheme. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTCqwCp7lGE

GitHub. (2022). GITHUB. https://github.com/toolness/accessible-color-matrix

W3C Web Accessibility Initiative. (2017). Introduction to Web Accessibility and W3C Standards

. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20SHvU2PKsM

W3C Web Accessibility Initiative. (2020). Checking Headings – Accessibility (from Digital Accessibility Foundations – Free Online Course). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR5hCvifJVo

 

 

 

The Search for Information

Theingi Tun on

 

Little Bit of History

You know the old joke “I am older than Google”. It’s true I have tried this in class, and it never fails to incite looks of shock and disbelief.

Being in this auspicious company, I also learnt how to code when computers were still using dos Prompts. So, this module about Google and other search engines have me so enthralled as well as nostalgic because that certainly takes me to the time this internet history was being made.

According to this article Google is not perfect. It still has glitches and bugs. It is not always correct and is never implicitly accurate. The short simple answers that return from a query can be collated into a featured snippet. Sometimes their collation can be wrong. Google tracks our search data and uses it for profit. Indexing the whole WWW is not an easy task. Think of all the images and videos out there. It is still growing and adapting.

From the reasoning for the amazing minds of Page and Brin who thought of the concept that resulted in the search engine that we all know and use. Google uses an algorithm that tests the links between each website and ranks them accordingly. For a website to be visible the search engine must be able to download it. It must be indexed in its database.  The team that created the algorithm from Google thought of this concept based on how academic citations were ranked according to how many papers they cite and how many still cite them. Of course, this is an oversimplification.

The implications for my practice

Am I using this modern wonder to its full potential? I watched this video and realised that there is so much more to Google. Like the elephant of my blog, depending on the user and search, it can give you different information depending on the way you ask.

When you enter a search term it returns with numerous hits. The tabs above show what is the most numerous types of result such as web, images, videos etc. For example, in a search for videos, you can then filter the results by search tools which can refine the search by duration, time, source, quality etc. From a teaching perspective captioning would be an important feature for selection for inclusivity. The source would be another feature for filtering if we want only authentic resources for teaching. The anytime filter could be used for recent information. The reading level filter on the Web tab provides appropriate reading level for students, making it a great teaching tool for differentiation. Often students stop reading a web resource for research will not get the information they require if they cannot understand the content. The Google.com/advanced search feature has many ways of filtering the information using explicit terms to look for and avoid. From a primary teacher’s perspective, I think the safe search filter is a great discovery. It will filter out inappropriate content when you are displaying search results.

I should not stop here. Now that I know Google and its limitations, I needed to explore the possibility of the same features on other search engines. The search for information should not be through only one source on the internet. Hence, I have compared the following search engines with the features that would be useful for teaching and learning.

Google Bing DuckDuckGo Kiddle
Collects personal information yes yes no Collected information is deleted every 24 hours
domain .com .com .com .co (children only)
Safe search filter yes yes yes yes
Adjustable reading level yes I could not find one I could not find one Yes. The hits are categorised according to reading level
License and usage rights Filter available Filter available Detailed usage right filters Most images and information have attribution shared alike license
Advertisements Yes. But not the top hits yes yes yes

 

References

Hollingsworth, S. (2020). 8 things that are wrong with Google search today. Search Engine Journal.

Battelle, J. (2005). The birth of Google. wired.

Epperson, D. (2017). Advanced Google search tips in 10 minutes